Hot Tub “Make It Work Project” Video

24 Thursday May 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Communication, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Do It Yourself, Ethics, Honor, Life, Make It Work, Management Practices, Marketing, Nevada, Public Image, Public Relations, Recreation, Respect, selling, Technology, Water

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Balboa Water Group, control pad, controller, DIY, Do It Yourself, heat, heater, home repair, Hot Tub, motor, pump, pumps, Spa

Make It Work: Hot Tub Repair

With a background and a degree in theatre, as well as years of home projects, I often have encountered “make it work” situations. My experiences in electrical and plumbing have allowed me to undertake projects that I would have never attempted as a young man.

A “Make It Work” project is a significant repair or build that is not done by a professional, nor done with a major budget. It is a project that involves adaptation and usually requires resolving several issues that are not part of the standard procedure.

I just completed a major repair on our hot tub (spa) and created a video that records the steps taken to replace several worn out key components.

Balboa Water Group: The Customer is the Enemy

The most significant challenge of this project was the anti-customer relations of the Balboa Water Group. Balboa was the company that made the controller that failed and the replacement. Their philosophy of support is to only deal with spa technicians and shun customers.

That philosophy is understandable as spa technicians require less interaction in troubleshooting a problem because of the technician’s familiarity with hot tubs. Customers require more explanation and are more time consuming. Because of the plumbing and electrical issues associated with a hot tub, most people rely on a professional technician to deal with any spa problems.

However, the customer is the person that actually purchases the product (one way or another) and the company should have some accountability to the customer. Balboa tech support is so anti-customer, the phone maze actually hangs up on the customer once the person identifies themselves as a customer, not a technician.

Fortunately, they will take emails from a customer, and tech support called me almost immediately after I sent an email, but the attitude of the support person was that I needed to hire a professional. He did give me enough information that I was able to know what to test, but he was elusive in giving me direct answers to my questions.

Their lack of cooperation and the confusing electrical design of the Balboa control board was responsible for about one-quarter of the time involved on this project.

Did F-117 Nighthawk Defeat USSR?

12 Thursday Apr 2018

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Air Force, Communism, F-117, Fall of USSR, fighter jet, military, Nighthawk, Russia, SAMs, Soviet Russia, surface to air missiles, U.S. Air Force, USSR

On 25 December 1991, Soviet Russia ended in a relative peaceful exchange of power. There were many reasons for the fall of communism, but one plane may have put the final stamp on the Soviet fate. Eleven months prior, the F-117 Nighthawk flew 1,300 sorties (missions) over Iraq during the Gulf War and proved it was almost invincible to modern air defenses. No one even knew about the plane three years prior to the Gulf War and with its domination over Iraq, the Soviets had lost the Cold War.

F-117 Nighthawk: The SciFi plane that won the Cold War?

F-117 Nighthawk: Plane of Science Fiction

A crazy idea. An invisible plane, at least invisible to radar. A plane that could sneak in and out of enemy airspace undetected. It was so crazy, no one thought it could be done…except Lockheed Martin. The absurdity of a stealth plane that could avoid radar detection helped keep it a secret until after it was already a reality.

The one problem was that a human couldn’t fly it. The aerodynamics of the odd surface angles changed the airflow around the plane and a pilot didn’t have the reflexes to respond fast enough before the plane was out of control. The pilot had to be assisted by a computer that interpreted the commands. It was the computer that managed the control surfaces to keep the Nighthawk from crashing.

The handling characteristics of the plane were a trade-off to the possibility of having a bomber that could breach enemy airspace undetected. A bomber that could hit targets with almost perfect accuracy. Soviet Russia had poured its technology into surface-to-air missiles (SAMs.) Those missiles could track down U.S. military jets and blow them out of the sky. Their effectiveness; however, depended on radar locating the jet. Without radar detection, Soviet SAMs could not be launched.

A New Reality

Once the Soviets learned of the F-117 Nighthawk, they knew that the United States could launch a first strike on Russia. An attack that they wouldn’t know about it until the first bomb hit the target. At the time, the Cold War had died down, but the Nighthawk made the idea of a war with the United States unwinnable. After the F-117 was revealed to the world, all of the military might of Soviet Russia became vulnerable to a handful of invisible planes.

In truth, there were many reasons that Soviet Russia fell. The decline of communism happened over decades. The economic and social issues were the prime causes of the USSR, but the F-117 created a new reality that Soviet Russia had not anticipated, nor could they overcome.

Employee Ownership? Does Business USA Own Its Employees?

11 Wednesday Apr 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in All Rights Reserved, Business, Communication, Donald Trump, Employee Retention, Ethics, Government, Honor, Human Resources, Information Technology, Internet, jobs, labor, Life, Management Practices, Nevada, Politicians, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, Relationships, Reno, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Technology, United States, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

13th Amendment, Akima, Business, company, corporations, Donald Trump, Employee, employee ownership, employee relations, Employer, flipping the bird, indentured servitude, Juli Briskman, quid pro quo, slavery

Employee Ownership?

It was a chance encounter. Juli Briskman was out riding her bike on a Saturday in October. Trump was just leaving from playing another round of golf. Trump’s motorcade passed Briskman and she saluted the Resident of the White House with her middle finger. Had a photographer not caught the act it would have just been another typical day. This day, it would get Briskman fired. The company’s position: it owns its employees.

Trump’s Single Digit Approval Rating

Quid Pro Quo

It’s important to note that Briskman was not identified in the photo, nor could she be identified as the photographer was behind her. She voluntarily told her company that she was the one in the photo. The company then fired her.

Employment is a quid pro quo environment. An employer agrees to pay compensation and benefits in return for certain specific tasks and responsibilities. Employment is not servitude, nor does it allow an employer to govern the employee’s actions 24/7/365. The Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States forbids indentured servitude along with slavery.

In the social media age, businesses have attempted to expand their authority over employees and govern hu’s (her/his) non-work activities. The problem is that if a company is allowed to govern free speech outside of the work environment they are essentially making a demand on an employee’s time, expression, and choice without compensation. Again, employment is a Quid Pro Quo environment and both parties must agree to the terms of what is offered in return for compensation and benefits.

Is the Reverse True?

The test of this situation is to reverse it. If the company can claim it can govern employee behavior during non-work hours for no pay, does that mean all employee non-work activity is a liability for the company? If an employee kills someone, can the victim’s family sue the company? The point is that a company cannot arbitrarily decide what non-work activities it governs. If it governs some non-work activities, shouldn’t the company assume responsibility for all non-work activities?

The reality is that business has failed to be reasonable in its limitations on employee rules and policies. It is now time to reestablish that quid pro quo relationship and stop attempting to ignore the 13th Amendment.

Murder Mystery: Did the Kremlin Kill Yuri Gagarin?

07 Saturday Apr 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in 1968, All Rights Reserved, Communism, Crime, Ethics, Exploration, Generational, Government, History, Honor, NASA, Politicians, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Relationships, Respect, Russian influence, Soviet Russia, Space, Technology

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

first person in space, Leonid Brezhnev, Russia, Russia Space Program, Soviet Russia, Soviet space program, Soviet Union, Soviets, Soyuz 1, Space, USSR, Vladimir Komarov, Yuri Gagarin

Fifty years ago Yuri Gagarin, the first human in space and the first to orbit the Earth, died in a plane crash. Hu’s (His) body wouldn’t be found until the next day. The crash was a mystery. How did a seasoned pilot, a test pilot, and a cosmonaut crash a plane on a routine flight? Was it murder? One person had the motive and the means to kill the Soviet space hero, but was it just a strange coincidence?

Yuri Gagarin: Soviet Hero. Brezhnev enemy?

Yuri Gagarin: Hero of the USSR

Yuri Gagarin was a Russian hero by any standard. Hu’s parents worked on a collective farm. During World War II, Gagarin’s family was driven out of their house by German soldiers and had to live in a small mud hut for over a year. After the war, hu (he) trained at a vocational school and attended evening classes. According to the Soviet narrative, hu took every advantage to improve himself, including volunteering on weekends to learn to fly with the Soviet Air Cadets.

Gagarin was drafted and sent to Soviet flight school to learn how to fly the MiG-15 jet. In 1960, hu was one of twenty men selected to become the first Soviet cosmonauts. When it came to selecting the first person to go into space, Gagarin stood out among his peers. One evaluator wrote this about Gagarin:

Soviet Doctor’s Evaluation

Modest; embarrasses when his humor gets a little too racy; high degree of intellectual development evident in Yuriy; fantastic memory; distinguishes himself from his colleagues by his sharp and far-ranging sense of attention to his surroundings; a well-developed imagination; quick reactions; persevering, prepares himself painstakingly for his activities and training exercises, handles celestial mechanics and mathematical formulae with ease as well as excels in higher mathematics; does not feel constrained when he has to defend his point of view if he considers himself right; appears that he understands life better than a lot of his friends.

From Wikipedia on Yuri Gagarin

Gagarin stubbornness to defend hu’s point of view may have led to hu’s death.

High-Risk Gamble

The mission to be the first human in space was inherently dangerous. From the launch, a controlled, directed explosion, to entering into the unknown environment of space, to reentering the atmosphere, the journey was filled with first-time events.

In addition, the Soviets didn’t know how to land a human back on Earth. The USSR’s plan was to touchdown on land rather than water. The problem was that parachutes can’t slow a spacecraft to a speed that won’t injure or kill the crew.

The solution was to allow the capsule to re-enter the Earth’s atmosphere, slow it down with parachutes, then have the cosmonaut jump out with his own personal parachute. It was risky, but it was a simple solution that allowed the Soviets to put a human in space before the United States. On 12 April 1961 Gagarin overcame the odds and made history.

Unacceptable Risk

Six years later the Soviets were still ahead in the space race. Soviet General Secretary Leonid Brezhnev wanted to keep it that way. For the 50th anniversary of the Russian Revolution, Brezhnev wanted to introduce the world to the new Soyuz capsule. He pushed to have two Soviet launches, one day apart, followed by a space rendezvous of the two spacecraft with an exchange of cosmonauts.

Soyuz 1 was to be piloted by Vladimir Komarov with Yuri Gagarin as a backup pilot. The two cosmonauts were close friends.

Months before the launch of the two rockets, the Gagarin and others inspected the Soyuz craft and found 203 structural problems. Gagarin wrote up a ten-page memo detailing the problems and demanding a delay in the program. He gave it to a friend who was a KGB agent to pass up the chain-of-command.

Allegedly, those that read memo were demoted or removed from the space program. It is unclear if Brezhnev actually saw the memo, but it was clear that no one wanted to challenge Brezhnev’s orders.

Death of a Friend

On the day of the launch, Gagarin demanded to be suited up, apparently to replace his friend, Komarov on the mission. Komarov did not want to go, but he also wasn’t willing to sacrifice Gagarin’s life. Komarov declined his friend’s offer and flew the mission.

As predicted, the spacecraft had major issues from the moment it reached orbit. After the Soyuz 2 launch was scrubbed, allegedly because of thunderstorms, Soyuz 1 was given the okay to return to Earth. Everyone knew that the capsule was unlikely to land safely. Komorov cursed his fate as his spacecraft plunged to Earth after the parachutes failed. It was a needless loss of life to satisfy the arrogance of Brezhnev.

Yuri Gagarin Poking the Bear With a Stick

Three weeks after hu’s friend’s death, Gagarin gave an interview that was published in Pravda. Hu blamed the people who allowed the launch of an unsafe capsule and indicated their complicity in Komarov’s death. Gagarin wanted to meet with Brezhnev and confront the man that everyone feared. It is unclear if this happened, but there was a rumor that Gagarin did have an encounter with the General Secretary and threw a drink in hu’s face.

It is clear that Gagarin was angry with Brezhnev, and it is also likely that Brezhnev was made aware of the situation. For Brezhnev, this had to be a potential political embarrassment and potentially dangerous to have a Russian hero question hu’s decisions.

Gagarin’s Mysterious Plane Crash

Gagarin’s anger at Brezhnev would be shortlived. About a year after Komarov’s death, Gagarin died in a mysterious plane crash. Among the odd aspects are:

Gagarin was a highly qualified pilot.
The crash was during Gagarin ‘recertification’ as a fighter pilot, deemed a formality.
The investigations found no exact cause for the crash.
Gagarin had completed the training maneuvers of the flight and had radioed that they were returning to base.
The plane disappeared without further contact.
Gagarin reported no issues of problems or crisis.
Searchers found the crash site later that day, but they didn’t find Gagarin’s body until the next day a short distance from the crash.
Another plane reportedly passed close to Gagarin’s plane before the crash.

If Brezhnev ordered Gagarin’s death it would have to look like a plausible accident. The most likely ‘accident’ for a pilot would be a plane crash. If not a deliberate act, Gagarin’s ‘accident’ benefited Brezhnev significantly by silencing a high-profile critic.

Another Coincidence

The circumstances of Yuri Gagarin’s death are strange enough, but there is one more coincidence. Gagarin’s death occurred just under two years from the release of the British movie, The Blue Max. A story about a German flying ace that had fallen out of the grace with hu’s superiors and died when flying a plane that was known to be unstable.

SpaceX’s Magical Block 5 Booster is a No Show

06 Friday Apr 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Ethics, Exploration, Falcon Heavy, Government, Honor, Management Practices, Mars, NASA, Nevada, Public Image, Public Relations, Reno, Science, Space, SpaceX, Technology, The Tipping Point, United States, US History, US Space Program

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Block 5, booster, delays, F9, Falcon 9, first stage, promises, SpaceX

Today is 6 April 2018. That deafening roar that you DIDN’T hear yesterday was the SpaceX Block 5 Falcon 9 rocket. It didn’t launch yesterday. Nor did it launch in February…nor in December. SpaceX plans fall short of reality again. The trademark of Elon Musk’s and his companies are their ability to fail to live up to their claims.

SpaceX One Trick: Wasting Money to Reland Junk Boosters

Block 5 Falcon 9 – The Grand Promise

Block 5 is the made-up name for SpaceX’s final version of the Falcon 9. It is critical to their hope to be NASA’s go-to company for the manned space program. There is a catch. SpaceX has to fly the Block 5 booster seven times without making any upgrades or changes before NASA will put humans onboard.

There is another catch. SpaceX entire company has been built around one concept: economical space flight. Their method is reusability, and the centerpiece is the reusable booster. Musk has made grand claims that the SpaceX booster will be used ten times. In addition, some people have been suggesting that the booster will only need an inspection and will be able to be reflown in a matter of days.

To date, the maximum any booster has been reused is once (F9 Boosters B1021, B1023, B1025, B1029, B1031, B1032, B1035, B1036, B1038, B1039, B1041.) Of the eleven reflown boosters, six were relanded after the second flight, but then they were ‘retired’ or junked. The rest were ‘expended’ or destroyed. None of these boosters were Block 5 types.

The Snake Oil of Spaceflight

Any cost savings of the reusable booster have been eliminated by the waste of expending, relanding, and recovering junk boosters. The delays of the Block 5 are costing SpaceX money, and the idea that a booster can be landed, inspected, and reflown in days was the boast of NASA with the Space Shuttle. NASA found out the hard way. It is not possible without endangering lives.

The other aspect of this is that only SpaceX knows how much these launches really cost. They are not making the cost per launch available to the public. They could be charging much less than the actual cost to hide the fact that the reusable booster doesn’t actually save money.

Space Customers Are Watching

The first Block 5 flight is now scheduled for 24 April. The first SpaceX crewed flight was scheduled for December. It is improbable, and likely impossible that SpaceX will be able to have seven successful Block 5 flights in time to meet the December deadline.

This delay comes after a five-year delay in the launch of the Falcon Heavy. The first one was a spectacular success, but there are two more scheduled launches of the Falcon Heavy this year. Both have to be on time and successful, or SpaceX will face increasing doubts about its reliability.

Should Federal Dollars Go To States With Low Taxes?

03 Tuesday Apr 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, All Rights Reserved, Business, Conservatives, Donald Trump, Economy, Ethics, Government, Honor, jobs, labor, Nevada, Politicians, Politics, Reno, Taxes, Technology, United States, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

capital gains tax, Colorado, corporate tax, federal dependent states, federal money, income tax, low tax states, low taxes, Nevada, Sierra Nevada Corp., state tax, tax, tax fairness, taxes

Nevada has no income tax, no corporate tax, no inventory tax, and no capital gains tax. Should the rest of the country be taxed to give money to Nevada? The idea that some State and local governments can avoid taxing their citizens, but expect to receive federal tax dollars is a question of fairness and equity. Perhaps the federal government should base allocations to States based on their willingness to act fiscally responsible?

Some States Pull Their Weight

Low Taxes Myth

There is a myth that low State taxes attracts businesses, that in turn, attracts jobs for the citizens. In Nevada, the tax haven does attract companies, but only those that seek to dodge taxes. The Sierra Nevada Corporation is a prime example. They are a private defense contractor that, among other things, seek to become the next privatized NASA.

The Sierra Nevada Corporation sounds like it would be a major employer in Nevada. It is not. Currently, it claims to have over 3,500 employees in 33 locations around the world. In 2014, about one-third of its employees were in Colorado and the potential job growth is at its Colorado facilities.

However, its corporate headquarters is in Nevada. The company was founded in Nevada; however, the State does not have the caliber of workers needed for the high technology jobs. So why not move the company to Colorado? Because the corporate staff and the company enjoy the tax immunity of Nevada.

Freeloader States

According to WalletHub.com, the ten State governments that are most dependent on federal money are as follows:

Louisiana
Mississippi
Arizona
Kentucky
New Mexico
Montana
Oregon
Tennessee
Missouri
Alaska

These States are the top ten with the lowest taxes on their residents, (with the ranking of federal dollar dependency,) according to USA Today (Taxes on corporations are not included):

Alaska (10)
Wyoming (20)
South Dakota (14)
Tennessee (8)
Louisiana (1)
Texas (21)
New Hampshire (31)
Nevada (36)
South Carolina (29)
Oklahoma (26)

Three of the top five having the lowest State taxes are also among the top ten State governments most dependent on federal money. The residents of another three of the top ten States with low taxes are in the top fifty percent in dependency on federal subsistence.

Five of the top ten States (Alaska, Wyoming, South Dakota, Texas, and Nevada) with the lowest taxes have no State income tax.

Pulling Their Weight

Many States use federal money to supplement their own tax revenue. It is only fair that they should. It is unfair that some States tilt the tax revenue field and expect federal money to replace State revenue. Perhaps it’s time that federal money should be restricted from States that do not have an adequate local and State tax structure to provide a foundation for services for their citizens before federal money is given to them.

Our Roving Intelligent Life On Mars

31 Saturday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in All Rights Reserved, Astronomy, China, Communism, Exploration, Government, History, Life, Mars, NASA, Photography, Pride, Science, Soviet Russia, Space, Technology, United States, US History, US Space Program, Vladimir Putin

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

China, Curiosity, ESA, intelligent life, Joint Propulsion Laboratory, JPL, life, Mars, NASA, Pathfinder, Rovers, roving, Russia, Russia Space Program, Sojourner, Soviet Russia

For over 2000 Mars-days* the Curiosity Rover has been strolling across the landscape of Mars. The Mission is known as the Mars Science Laboratory and the star is Curiousity. Google defines intelligence as, “the ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills.” Under that definition, Curiosity and its predessors certainly qualify as intelligent life on another planet.

[*Mars-day or sols = 24 hours + 37 minutes of Earth time]

Mars = Soviet Humiliation

To date, humans have attempted to send 55¹ missions to Mars and over half of them have failed. Soviet Russia tried to launch 20 missions and none of them were a complete success. Two misssion were mostly successful, and three of them were mostly failures. The other 15 missions were complete failures.

Russia seemed to give up sending missions to Mars after 1988. Since the fall of Communism, Russia has attempted two probes, both failed. Russia’s only successful probe to the Red planet is a joint orbiter mission with the European Space Agency (ESA) that is still in operation.

In comparison to Russia’s single success out of 23 attempts, India has sent one mission to Mars and the orbiter is now on an extended mission.

[¹NOTE: An orbiter/lander mission is counted as two separate missions.]

What We Know About Mars, Thank NASA/JPL

NASA and its partners like the Joint Propulsion Lab (JPL) have been responsible for putting intelligent life on Mars. Five out of the current eight operational missions are NASA/JPL missions. The Mars Odyssey mission was launched 17 years ago (April 2001) and is expected to be operational until 2025.

The United States is the only country to successfully have a rover on Mars and it has a perfect record in four attempts (Sojourner, Spirit, Opportunity, and Curiosity.) The Opportunity rover was launched in 2003 and is still operational.

Curiosity takes a selfie on Mars

Curiouser and Couriouser

The Couriosity rover was on a two-year mission after its successful 2012 landing. It is now on an extended mission without an end date. It continues to explore and offer new insights; however, it is a mission that has almost been too successful. As it continues to wander around Gale crater, one has to wonder how much more can our rover-on-the-ground learn in one location?

As it rolls beyond 2000 sols will its constant poking, prodding, and picture-taking result in more knowledge, or bias our understanding based on the massive data from one region? Perhaps we will find out in 2020. Three new rovers are scheduled for launch that year. The United States will send Mars 2020, ESA will send ExoMars 2020, and the yet to be named 2020 Chinese Mars Mission will also be sent.

Falling Sky: China’s Tiangong 1 Space Station Last Hours

28 Wednesday Mar 2018

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

atmosphere, China, Chinese Space Agency, deorbit, ISS, orbit, Skylab, Space Station, Tiangong 1

Within the next 72 hours China’s first space station, the Tiangong 1, is going to end its life. It is already scraping the extreme upper atmosphere of Earth and the air resistance is slowing down the 7.7 metric tons (8.5 ton) spacecraft with every passing second. It is coming down somewhere, but scientists don’t know exactly when or where.

The rapid altitude decline (in km) of Tiangong 1

Current Stats of Tiangong 1

The current speed of the Tiangong 1 (27 March 2018 at 12 noon PDT) is at 28,000 km/hr (17,400 mph) and it is at an altitude of just under 200 km (125 mi) at the lowest point in its orbit. Its orbit has lowered by over 60 km in the last two months. As Tiangong 1 approaches 160 km the air resistance will be too much for it to maintain orbit.

Statistically, Tiangong 1 will most likely fall into an ocean; however, there is a possibility that it could fall on southern Europe, southern Asia, Africa, Austrailia, South America, Central America, or the United States.

Lost Contact

Normally, objects like this are brought down in a controlled fall using thrusters to slow the craft down at a specific time and location. In the case of Tiangong 1, the Chinese engineers had planned to bring it down in a controlled reentry until they mysteriously lost contact with it two years ago.

China said they had shut down telemetry with Tiangong 1 in March of 2016. They didn’t admit they had lost control of it until amateur astronomers had confirmed the space station was tumbling in space a few months later. Without the ability to communicate with the space station, there is no way to command the thrusters for a controlled reentry.

Best Guess?

The experts are currently estimating that Tiangong 1 will come down on Easter Sunday (1 April.) Since Earth’s atmosphere expands and contracts with solar activity, the air resistance is not consistent. There is a critical point when the air resistance will win its battle with the space station and the orbit will decay exponentially. At that point, the spacecraft will begin a rapid breakup as it descends through the thicker atmosphere.

For what it’s worth, my guess is 7:42 am PDT on Saturday, 31 March.

Journalism Ethics: Interviewing the Reporter As a News Source

27 Tuesday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in All Rights Reserved, Business, Communication, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Donald Trump, Entertainment, Ethics, Generational, Government, History, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, Journalism, Language, Opinion, Politicians, Politics, Print Media, Public Image, Public Relations, Republic, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Technology, Traditional Media, United States, Website, Wordpress, Writing

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

community relations, Facebook, investors, journalism standards, journalistic ethics, journalists, local news., local tv news, media companies, media organizations, Newspapers, PR, Public Relations, reporters, Standards

News organizations have not evolved as much as they have devolved over the last sixty years. Journalism ethics have suffered the greatest. The priority in news organizations has shifted from high journalistic standards to gaining market share. The news anchor or primary news host now use the reporter as hu’s* news source.

I can't match the anchor's name to any of the CNN faces online

CNN news anchor interview CNN reporter Matt Rivers

How Did We Get Here?

Originally, the news reporter job was to gather the facts, confirm the facts, and organize the facts into a story. The myth of Superman’s girlfriend getting the scoop and landing a Page One, Pulitzer Prize article wasn’t how it really happened.

Good journalism was the verification of the facts, careful research, and exposing lies. In the end, the reporter’s name was the byline, not the storyline. Reporters needed the attention to detail of an accountant, the interrogation skill of a great attorney, the ethics of a great judge, and the knowledge of a college professor, in addition to the ability to write a compelling story.

But when investors began buying up news organizations, money became the priority over journalism standards. Advancement was based who could attract a bigger audience. Women were brought into the newsroom, but the motivation was ratings, not equality. Money flowed to those that could produce shock and awe. The young, idealistic journalism graduate discovered that a reporter was underpaid, overworked, and disrespected.

And while the journalism standards fell, the news source wall went up. Organizations created ‘public relations’ experts to ‘control the message.’ Now a reporter is the person between the news organization looking for ratings and the news source that wants to be a shining star.

Corporate Public Relations Mastery of Orwellian Doublespeak

Not every company believes in lying to the public, but it does seem the bigger they are, the less responsive they are willing to be. The most recent major incident is Facebook’s initial response to the data of 50 million users being collected by conservatives connected to the Donald Trump campaign.

After the story broke on Saturday 17 March, Facebook ran silent for days before issuing any response. Journalists that attempted to obtain information and/or a response were ignored. Major headlines were running about the data breach and Facebook was on lockdown.

Corporate PR has made the company the least likely source of accurate, reliable, and/or truthful information. So now the reporter digs up whatever information they can and becomes the ‘expert.’ The news anchor often interviews the reporter as the sole news source because no one else will talk.

The problem with this is that the reporter can’t speak with authority. They are not privy to the inside information so they can only offer hu’s opinion. That changes journalism into gossip and guessing. No one can be sure of anything because no one knows the truth. That leaves it up to the individual to accept what they want to hear and reject what they don’t want to hear. That is never good for a democracy.

[*Hu’s is a gender neutral pronoun for his or her.]

The Sad Life of a Russian Troll (Печальная жизнь русского тролля)

26 Monday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in All Rights Reserved, Branding, Business, Communication, Donald Trump, Economy, Employee Retention, Ethics, Government, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, jobs, labor, Language, Life, Politicians, Politics, Public Image, Random, Respect, Russian influence, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Technology, Travel, United States, US History, Vladimir Putin, Voting, Website, Writing

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

fake identities, fake news, GOP, Russia, Russian, Russian Troll Farms, Soviets, Troll Farms, Trumpsters, USSR, Vladimir Putin, Web Brigade

It is a statement of life in Russia when one of the best jobs to be had is employment to write fake news stories, deceive people, and attempt to create chaos in other countries. Russian Troll Farms, or Web Brigades, as they refer to themselves, tell us more about Russian life, than about Western gullibility. What follows is my own fake story of an interview with a Russian Troll.

Troll – a mythical creature in folklore living in caves or hills or under bridges as either a giant or a dwarf, typically having a very ugly appearance.

Living Large in Russia: Condos in St. Petersburg

Interview With A Russian Troll

[NOTE: Some language may be inappropriate for young readers.]

Interviewer: What’s your job? (Кем вы работаете?)

Russian Troll: I learned to speak English so I could be paid to agitate and influence people in the United States to vote for politicians like we have in Russia. (Я научился говорить по-английски, чтобы мне могли заплатить за то, чтобы агитировать и влиять на людей в Соединенных Штатах, чтобы голосовать за таких политиков, как у нас в России.)

Interviewer: How does that help Russia? (Как это помогает России?)

Russian Troll: It doesn’t, but it makes the Americans suffer like we have to suffer in this shithole country. (Это не так, но это заставляет американцев страдать, как мы должны страдать в этой стране.)

Interviewer: Why do you do it? (Почему ты это делаешь?)

Russian Troll: I live in Russia. How else can I pay the bills? (Я живу в России. Как еще я могу оплатить счета?)

Interviewer: The economy of the United States drives the economy of the rest of the world. If you’re successful, aren’t you afraid of a worldwide economic disaster? (Экономика Соединенных Штатов стимулирует экономику остального мира. Если вы добились успеха, разве вы не боитесь мировой экономической катастрофы?)

[Language warning]

Russian Troll: Don’t tell me about disaster until you’ve seen the crappy place where I live in the middle of winter. Fuck the Americans. Fuck the rest of the world. They all celebrated when Americans landed on the Moon. They all celebrated when the Berlin Wall fell. Fuck them! (Не говори мне о бедствии, пока не увидишь дерьмовое место, где я живу в середине зимы. Ебать американцев. Трахайте весь остальной мир. Все они отмечали, когда американцы высадились на Луну. Все они праздновали, когда упала Берлинская стена. Трахайте их!)

Interviewer: What about your children? How will your work help them? (Как насчет ваших детей? Как ваша работа поможет им?)

Russian Troll: Who cares? Did anyone care about me when I was a child? For the last twenty years no one cares, so why should I care? (Какая разница? Кто-нибудь заботился обо мне, когда я был ребенком? За последние двадцать лет никто не заботится, так зачем мне это волновать?)

Interviewer: You mean the last twenty years when Vladimir Putin has led your country? (Вы имеете в виду последние двадцать лет, когда Владимир Путин привел вашу страну?)

Russian Troll: Exactly!…No, wait. YOU TRICK ME! (Quickly looks around) No, Putin has been good. I mean Putin has been great. Great! Putin is a great leader! (Точно! .. Нет, подожди. ВЫ ТРЕТЬЕ МЕНЯ! Нет, Путин был хорош. Я имею в виду, что Путин был замечательным. Большой! Путин – великий лидер!)

Interviewer: What does a Russian troll do after they leave the Farm? (Что делает русский тролль после ухода из фермы?)

Russian Troll: First of all, we are not a Troll Farm. We are a Web Brigade! We fight a war against the Free Countries of the World! We will bring them to their knees! Second, when I finish here I will be rich! I will never have to work again! I will move to America and be a…how you say,…big?, BIG, yes?, I will be a big man! You will know me by my shiny red sports car! (Прежде всего, мы не Ферма Троллей. Мы – веб-бригада! Мы ведем войну против Свободных стран мира! Мы поставим их на колени! Во-вторых, когда я закончу здесь, я буду богат! Мне больше никогда не придется работать! Я перееду в Америку и буду … как вы говорите, … большой?, БОЛЬШОЙ, да ?, Я буду большим человеком! Ты узнаешь меня своим блестящим красным спортивным автомобилем!)

Saturn V’s F-1 Engine: The Monster That Made USSR Cry

24 Saturday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in 1968, About Reno, Aging, All Rights Reserved, Exploration, Generational, Government, History, Honor, NASA, Nevada, Politics, Pride, Relationships, Reno, Saturn V, Science, Space, Technology, United States, US History, US Space Program

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

booster, F-1 engine, Moon, Moon landings, Moon rocket, N1, NASA, NK-15 engine, Rocketdyne F-1 engine, Saturn V, Soviet Union, Soviets, space race, USSR

When Vladimir Putin was a young man he was witness to his country’s space program being eclipsed by the United States. There are many reasons that the United States won the space race with the USSR, but Rocketdyne’s Saturn V F-1 engine was the element that the Soviet space program couldn’t replicate. It was a rocket engine that has no practical use for piddling around in Earth orbit. The F-1 is the top shelf engine of space exploration.

The massive F-1 engines of the Apollo Saturn V first stage booster.

Who Are Those Guys?

If there was a moment when the Soviet engineers said in wonder, “Who are those guys?,” it was when they saw the first massive Saturn V blast off using only five engines. They were working on a heavy-lift rocket that used 30 rocket engines in the booster phase. The idea that a Moon rocket could be designed using only five engines was laughable.

The USSR attempted four launches with their version of the Saturn V rocket called the N1 rocket. All four attempts failed. The Saturn V rocket had 13 successful launches in 13 attempts. One rocket (unmanned Apollo 6) had vibration issues and failed to make the desired orbit, but the launch was successful. NASA and its contractors crushed the Soviet Moon rocket in performance and reliability.

Comparing Watermelons To Sour Grapes

The Soviet N1 Moon rocket used the NK-15 engines on the first, or booster stage. Compared to the Apollo Saturn V F-1 engines, the USSR effort was similar to strapping a bunch of bottle rockets together to lift a person off the ground.

Each of the 30 NK-15 engines could lift about 1,500 kilonewtons or kN (1 kilonewton equals 224.81 pounds of force) compared to a single F-1 engine thrust of 7,000 kN. The total thrust of the first stage of the Soviet N1 Moon rocket was 45,400 kN, which was significantly greater than the Saturn V’s booster thrust of 35,100 kN and the N1 Moon rocket was 215,000 kg (480,000 lbs.) lighter.

The USSR 30 NK-15 engine design

However, the N1 required four stages compared to the Saturn V’s three-stage rocket, and the N1 booster stage could only burn for 125 seconds, while’s United States booster stage burned for 168 seconds. The big difference was the size of payload that the Saturn V could deliver to the Moon. USSR’s N1 could only put a 23,500 kg payload (51,800 lbs.) out of Earth orbit to the Moon, while the Saturn V could send a 48,600 kg (107,100 lbs.) payload.

The Rocketdyne F-1 engine was responsible for powering everything needed for a Moon landing and safe return off the surface of the Earth and it did it better than any other rocket engine in the history of space exploration.

100 Consecutive Days of Writing

22 Thursday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Branding, Communication, Generational, habits, Health, Internet, Journalism, Language, Lessons of Life, Life, Mental Health, Nevada, Reno, review, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Technology, Website, Wordpress, Writing

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

100 days, Blogging, journalism, language, Publishing, words, writer, writing

On 13 December 2017, I published an article titled, “Send Our Trash Into Space.” That began a streak of 100 consecutive days of posting an article. I had no grand plan to start publishing daily, but after a week it became addictive. I decided to go for two weeks, then a month. Now it’s been over three months, and I’ve discovered something about writing every day. It’s about me.

Personal View Writing is Historical, Not Instant Analysis

Writing on a frequent basis is not great for the reader. There is a saturation point at which I passed a long time ago. To keep someone’s attention over the long-term usually requires a mystery, sensationalism, a serial-type plot, or some other device to capture a reader’s mind. I write in an episodic style that is observational. My readership numbers ebb and flow depending on the topic, but I’m not writing to attract an audience.

Our world has become obsessed with instant analysis, interview the person on the street, report the story before we have the facts, and/or assess the pulse of our society based on what is trending on social media. That is not necessarily bad, but it is not news. That is ‘entertainment.’ Its focus is attracting a bigger audience.

News organizations have always fought for market share, but in the days of Watergate and before, journalistic integrity was the foundation and audience size was secondary. Now all the media organizations are investor-owned and viewer/listener/reader body count is the center of the news world. When the goal of ‘news’ media is based on the size of the audience, the focus turns to the most outrageous, most shocking, most disgusting stories.

We have made the news into a for-profit business, and that means its primary focus is to entertain, not report. What is needed is an alternate view that is not about trying to entertain to attract an audience. The perspective of the individual writer, devoid of concerns of the accountants, is the last remnant of what was called journalism.

Witness To a Calamity

I am convinced we are in a time of crisis. We are the frogs in the pot that the heat has been slowly turned up to a boil. Many are in a state of denial, but no one can deny that our society is in upheaval with a severe conflict in process.

I am not the one who can judge the effectiveness of my writing but I hope that by offering my perspective, not for entertainment or market share, that it will give the sense of the time of this crisis. Our country has made horrible mistakes that the future needs to understand.

I’m sure people in the future will wonder at how we allowed these Republicans and this President to rise to power. In part, my political writing is to give my viewpoint in how and why that happened. Writing is a recording of history and the United States in 2018 is a time of dire history.

My Method

Not all my writing is about politics. I also try to interject subjects that interest and/or amaze me. I’m not sure I can claim to have a method in my writing. Most of the time I create a working title for the topic a few days in advance. Usually, that is all I have to start with when I start writing. I don’t plan out, nor outline my articles. If I have multiple points to make in an story I will sometimes write draft headings to remind me.

Typically, I do some research on the issue, but sometimes that doesn’t occur until a reach the point in the article that I’m trying to say something that should be backed up with a fact or source. I link to my sources rather than footnote the source. If I’m writing a reaction piece to an event or act I will link the article or include a quote.

I’m not held to any standard of truth, but my own. There have been times I have started writing about a topic and changed my opinion about the issue during my research. As a liberal, I know I have an opinion, but I it also means that I have to support my opinion. That doesn’t make my opinion correct, but it is absolutely required in a decent society.

The Score

In 2016 I wrote 40 articles using 22,085 words (an average of 552 words per article.) In 2017 I wrote 53 articles using 23,954 words (an average of 452 words per article.) So far in 2018 I’ve written 82 articles (including this one) using 47,337 words (an average of 577 words per article.)

I don’t know if I will keep going on the streak. I have other writing projects that I would like to finish and I find that writing at this pace is difficult to maintain. Regardless, this has been very rewarding for me. I hope it has been of some benefit to you.

Looking Back

Here are the articles I’ve published during the last 100 days (and more):

DECEMBER 2017

DATE

TITLE

WORDS

13-Dec-17	Send Our Trash Into Space	271
14-Dec-17	The End of the United States of America	225
15-Dec-17	School Vouchers Are About Religion and Racism, Not Choice	625
16-Dec-17	Journalists Using Uneducated, Uninformed Opinion As Fact	237
17-Dec-17	Government Regulation Makes USA Business Great	412
18-Dec-17	Redacted Review of Star Wars: The Last Jedi	477

[NOTE: Articles from 19 December 2017 to 28 February 2018 are not currently linked. This is being corrected.]


19-Dec-17	What Happens In Sixty Years	304
20-Dec-17	Senator Dean Heller is Still a Stockbroker	298
21-Dec-17	A New Year’s Earthquake?	386
22-Dec-17	Review of Star Wars: The Last Jedi	217
22-Dec-17	Failure to Diagnose: Right Hemisphere Strokes	482
23-Dec-17	SpaceX and Mars: The Illogical Strategy	453
24-Dec-17	GOP War on the Spirit of Christmas	326
25-Dec-17	Can Venus Be Made Habitable?	475
26-Dec-17	Illogical: Commercial Real Estate Price Boom in an Internet Economy	183
27-Dec-17	Religion Controls Equality For Women	398
28-Dec-17	Dear Republican: Your Party Left Without You	345
29-Dec-17	1929 is Coming	216
30-Dec-17	Are You Not Breathing When You Sleep?	670
31-Dec-17	Understanding Global Warming and Cold Weather	530

JANUARY 2018

DATE

TITLE

WORDS

1-Jan-18	Why a Bigger Government is Being Fiscally Responsible	507
2-Jan-18	Need a New Plan for Gaining Political Support	285
3-Jan-18	Nevada’s Pot Business About to be Smoked	401
4-Jan-18	Telsa Powerwall Has Product-Killing Questions Unanswered	1000
5-Jan-18	Trump Corrupt Public Relations: Using Business PR as the Model	393
6-Jan-18	12 Days in 1968	956
7-Jan-18	1968 Mystery: Four Subs Lost In Four Months	626
8-Jan-18	To Sleep, Perchance To Dream	327
9-Jan-18	Panamá versus Oklahoma: Transportation	457
10-Jan-18	Zuma Fail: Why Space Is No Place For Private Business	509
11-Jan-18	Rapid HR Hiring Process Required In Professional Environment	477
12-Jan-18	ICE Solidifies Itself As Trump’s SS Police	555
13-Jan-18	About This, About Writing	412
14-Jan-18	Panamá’s Caribbean Afterthought	805
15-Jan-18	Why You Won’t See A Tax Cut	338
16-Jan-18	Why Trumpsters Don’t Understand Anti-Trump Reactions	377
17-Jan-18	Should the Nuremberg Code Be Applied to Internet Data Collection?	1212
18-Jan-18	Government Shutdown An Opportunity	416
19-Jan-18	NASA’s Orion Capsule: A ‘Look Busy’ Project?	1067
20-Jan-18	Total Lunar Eclipse January 31…Western United States	243
21-Jan-18	Popes That Damned Women, Choice, and Humanity	708
22-Jan-18	An Indictment Against NPR Journalism Standards	745
23-Jan-18	SpaceX Falcon Heavy-Lift Rocket: A Soviet-Style Disaster?	865
24-Jan-18	Why the Stock Market is Like a Strip Club	316
25-Jan-18	Trump and GOP Causing Emotional Numbness?	455
26-Jan-18	Employee Relations: The You’re-Not-Getting-a-Raise-Letter	342
27-Jan-18	Why We Elect the Wrong People?: #1 Business Wants Dumb Politicians	428
28-Jan-18	The Day Business Killed The NASA Space Program	1246
29-Jan-18	The State of the Union of the United States of America	1069
30-Jan-18	Why We Elect the Wrong People?: #2 We Don’t Understand the Purpose of a Republic	592
31-Jan-18	2018 Blue Moon Lunar Eclipse	499

FEBRUARY 2018

DATE

TITLE

WORDS

1-Feb-18	Zuma Mystery: It’s Classified and Invisible…Apparently	777
2-Feb-18	Should You Become a Parent?	789
3-Feb-18	The Plantar Wart and HPV	385
4-Feb-18	Housing Prices Edge Closer to Catastrophe	419
5-Feb-18	Stock Market Symptom of Great Depression, Not Cause	629
6-Feb-18	GOP Memo is Last Straw	343
7-Feb-18	SpaceX Falcon Heavy Defies the Odds	484
8-Feb-18	66 Years Ago: A Princess in Africa Becomes Queen	392
9-Feb-18	North Korea Bizzare Olympics Stunt	382
10-Feb-18	Snowpack is No Longer a Viable Water Supply	583
11-Feb-18	500th WordPress PAULx Post: Milestone of Words	553
12-Feb-18	Forget Stock Market & Bitcoin, Invest in Mendadent Toothpaste	329
13-Feb-18	Reno Nevada Mayor Schieve Declares She is Uninformed	804
14-Feb-18	To Love Your Child, Be Honest With Them	652
15-Feb-18	Corp USA: “The Stock Market Requires We Underpay You”	312
16-Feb-18	Space Exploration Isn’t Profitable, It’s Transformative	707
17-Feb-18	McDonald’s Shake Machines Legendary Unreliability	551
18-Feb-18	Mass Shooters Not Criminals Before They Picked Up A Gun	341
19-Feb-18	Are These People the Next Mass Shooter?	353
20-Feb-18	Center of the Milky Way: Update	608
21-Feb-18	Second Amendment: A Well Regulated Militia	501
22-Feb-18	Victims of Major Mass Shootings Since Sandy Hook Elementary	709
23-Feb-18	David Brooks is Wrong Again on Guns	473
24-Feb-18	Five ‘Facts’ About the Equinox?	529
25-Feb-18	Trumpster ‘Hillary’ Excuse Proves Russian Influence	1701
26-Feb-18	Hiding Journalists Behind the Paywall	527
27-Feb-18	My Imaginary Interview with Marketplace’s Kai Ryssdal	499
28-Feb-18	SpaceX 2018 Launch Schedule Is PR Gold or PR Nightmare	681

MARCH 2018

DATE

TITLE

WORDS

1-Mar-18	Pigs In Space: Discrimination on the ISS	744
2-Mar-18	Trump’s Family: Keepers of the Big Liar	335
3-Mar-18	Is There a Planet Nine or Not?	553
4-Mar-18	Urban Coyotes	609
5-Mar-18	Could David Brooks Be Correct About Being Wrong?	664
5-Mar-18	Breaking News: Trump Loses Control of Hotel in Panama	321
6-Mar-18	Pence’s White Greed National Space Council	710
7-Mar-18	Trump’s Trade Deficit Talk Proves Lack of Knowledge	522
8-Mar-18	Leadership Madness: Time To Check Trump’s Urine Color	373
9-Mar-18	Three Myths That Gun Extremist Believe	350
10-Mar-18	Magnetic Pole Reversal: Will It Turn Our World Upside Down?	620
11-Mar-18	Time To Stop Changing Time? Why We Need Daylight Saving Time All Year	425
12-Mar-18	Are We Ready For Gender Neutral Language?	355
13-Mar-18	Why Are Conservatives Anti-Society?	558
14-Mar-18	NRA is Not a Gun Safety Organization	719
15-Mar-18	The Ides of March is Really About the Moon	381
16-Mar-18	Three Steps For Solving the Assault-Type Weapons Problem	375
17-Mar-18	Saint Patrick Wasn’t Irish and Other Facts?	461
18-Mar-18	Roots of ‘Easter’ Myth Adapted For New Testament	946
19-Mar-18	Why Are There 360 Degrees in a Circle?	376
20-Mar-18	First Day of Spring is Fake News	506
21-Mar-18	Ten Reasons There is Life on Earth	965
22-Mar-18	100 Consecutive Days of Writing	828
23-Mar-18	GOP Disease: Say It, Then Apologize	477
24-Mar-18	Saturn V’s F-1 Engine: The Monster That Made USSR Cry	445
25-Mar-18	Trump’s Tariffs Are For Putin	775
26-Mar-18	The Sad Life of a Russian Troll (Печальная жизнь русского тролля)	697
27-Mar-18	Journalism Ethics: Interviewing the Reporter As a News Source	507
28-Mar-18	Falling Sky: China’s Tiangong 1 Space Station Last Hours	355
29-Mar-18	Novice Directors Make Theatre Painful	536
30-Mar-18	Trump’s Soviet-Style Government	409
31-Mar-18	Our Roving Intelligent Life On Mars	427

APRIL 2018

DATE

TITLE

WORDS

1-Apr-18	April Fool’s Day is Donald Trump Day	368
2-Apr-18	Tax Breaks Don’t Work When Everyone is Giving Them	502
3-Apr-18	Should Federal Dollars Go To States With Low Taxes?	451
4-Apr-18	The Dichotomy of Small Towns: Good People, Small Minds	608
5-Apr-18	My First and Final (gulp) Imaginary Interview With Terry Gross	833

Time To Stop Changing Time? Why We Need Daylight Saving Time All Year

11 Sunday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Aging, All Rights Reserved, Astronomy, Daylight Saving Time, Economy, Generational, Government, habits, Health, History, Lessons of Life, Mental Health, Recreation, Reno, Science, solar, Space, Technology, Travel, United States, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

clock, Daylight Saving Time, DST, Standard Time, time change, Year Round

Many people dislike the two days of the year we go to or revert from Daylight Saving Time (DST.) It requires changing the clocks and adjusting to the new rhythm of our activity related to the rise and set of the Sun. It is annoying and, as a species, annoyance is a prompt for finding a solution. Perhaps it is time to stop changing time.

A Problem of Degrees

We should recognize that the length of day is only an issue for those living between 30° and 70° latitude. The length of day within 30° of the equator doesn’t radically change from summer to winter. Above 70° latitude, the Sun sets for weeks or months during the winter and there are not many people living that close to the poles.

For those living between 30° and 70° latitude, there is an undeniable problem. Reno, Nevada, USA is at 39° north latitude. At the summer solstice, the day is almost 15 hours long and sunrise is at 5:30 am under Daylight Saving Time. If we did not have DST, the sun would rise at 4:30 am.

A Diurnal Vespertine-Adapted Species

In an agrarian economy, working in the field is easier during daylight hours. In that situation, time is relative to a solar schedule; however, in an interactive urban economy, working in shops and offices is more suitable for a common clock schedule.

After artificial electric light became the standard, and after the population moved into cities, we became a diurnal, vespertine-adapted species. Most of our country’s population works during the daylight hours and participates in non-work activities in the evenings. Today, most people are not active before six in the morning, but they remain active until 10 pm or later.

Sunrise before 6 am disturbs the typical sleep patterns of humans, and light later into the evening is more suitable for evening activities. Daylight Saving Time creates a favorable environment for a later sunrise and more sun in the evening.

Daylight Saving Time Year Round

Standard Time was traditionally based on the position of the Sun at High Noon. That approximately divided the daylight into Morning and Afternoon. We no longer use High Noon as the foundation of Standard Time; however, it is an artifact of a primarily agrarian economy. Daylight Saving Time was used to adapt the clock to human behavior as we moved from the farms to more urban living.

Time is a human invention. It should serve the needs of humans. It would seem it is time to stop punishing humans with Standard Time and remain on Daylight Savings Time for the entire year.

Magnetic Pole Reversal: Will It Turn Our World Upside Down?

10 Saturday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Astronomy, Education, Exploration, Generational, History, NASA, Science, solar, Space, Technology, US Space Program

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

cosmic radiation, cosmic rays, Curious Droid, Earth, flip, Liquid core, magnetic pole reversal, magnetic poles, North Pole reversal, solar radiation, South Pole reversal, sunspot cycle, sunspot maximum, sunspot minimum, swap

The magnetic north and south poles are up to something. It looks like Earth’s magnetic poles are about to swap. It usually happens every 300,000 years or so but it’s been 780,000 years since it last happened. What does it mean for humans? Is this the end of human civilization?

Earth magnetic normal magnetic field (left) and during a swap (right)

Pole Reversal: Another Y2K?

To answer this question let’s go back to 1984. That is the year that Jerome and Marilyn Murray published a book called Computers in Crisis, changed to The Year 2000 Computing Crisis in 1996. They laid out a problem of computer code that handled dates using only the last two digits of the year. The crisis was that at the moment the year 2000 began, they said all the computer networks around the world would crash. This was known as the Y2K problem.

The Y2K problem was a significant issue; however, because computer codes are constantly being changed, updated, and replaced, it probably would have been resolved without the hyper-scare stories in the media. Computer codes were changed and Y2K came and passed without incident.

That Y2K problem is a good comparison to the North/South magnetic pole reversal issue. There is a problem, but it is a problem that will unfold over hundreds to thousands of years. Most will not notice the effect in the next decade, but there is a significant change coming as soon as the next solar minimum.

Your Magnetic Field is Temporarily Out of Order

The problem is not about the reversal of the magnetic poles. The problem is about the process of the reversal. The magnetic field around Earth deflects cosmic and solar radiation from reaching Earth’s surface. Without this field (or shield) life, as we know it on Earth, would not be possible.

As the poles begin the process of swapping the magnetic field it becomes less organized. This results in the magnetic north and south pole fading and that causes cosmic radiation to come closer to Earth’s surface.

In addition, the magnetic field becomes weaker during solar sunspot minimums. This is when the Sun has few, if any, sunspots and generates less solar flares. This lull in solar activity approximately every eleven years is matched with a similar lull in the strength of Earth’s magnetic field.

Captain! Our Shields Are Down!

Scientists have discovered that the magnetic field is weakening much faster now than in the past. They believe the process of pole reversal, which is overdue by about 400,000 years, has now begun. We are also in the beginning stages of the solar minimum, which will result in an anemic magnetic field for the next two to three years.

Projections of the radiation dosage for this upcoming solar minimum were about 20% above the last solar minimum; however, actual rates are closer to 30% so far. This is not a major concern, but it does mean that satellites may encounter more radiation that could damage or disable them. It also means that an astronaut only can spend about 700 days in space now than the 1,000 days they could spend in the 1990’s.

Oh Where, Oh Where Will Our North Pole Go?

The poles are on the move thanks to a liquid layer of iron in Earth’s Core. Earth is already experiencing a strange phenomenon of magnetic weakening across the South Atlantic stretching from Africa to South America. Since we have not experienced this change before, no one can be absolutely sure what odd side effects may occur during the process; however, the only significant concern is increased radiation in Earth’s atmosphere and in orbit.

It’s important to remember that in geologic time frames we are the equivalent of lightning. As problems develop we’re pretty good at responding.

Trump’s Trade Deficit Talk Proves Lack of Knowledge

07 Wednesday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in All Rights Reserved, Business, Donald Trump, Economy, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, History, jobs, labor, Management Practices, Nevada, Politicians, Politics, Public Image, racism, Relationships, Russian influence, selling, Stock Market, Taxes, Technology, Trade deficit, United States, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

APM, Art of The Deal, Donald Trump, Kai Ryssdal, Marketplace, npr, protectionism, protectionist, tariffs, taxes, Trade Deficit, trade war

Trade deficits are bad. Everyone knows a trade deficit is bad. So when a person goes to a store and buys a product they have a trade deficit with that store. That’s bad, correct? They have the product that has value but they don’t have the money. The person has less money and the store has more. That is a trade deficit. So why don’t we build, mine, and/or grow everything so we don’t have a trade deficit?

Tariffs and Trade Wars Kill an Economy

Kai Ryssdal of American Public Media’s (APM) Marketplace had Ryan Kailath explain this on Tuesday using a sandwich shop. The point he made with his report was that we don’t ‘lose’ money in a trade deficit. It’s a point that Mr. “Art of the Deal” Donald Trump should understand, but his words and actions indicate he that he doesn’t understand the basics of international trade.

Trade Deficit: It’s Not Just About Jobs

Many people focus on jobs when discussing the trade deficit. When other countries make stuff that we buy they create jobs for people in their country. It’s easy to argue that when they have the jobs, we don’t. That’s not necessarily true, nor relevant.

We are the 362.874 kg gorilla in the room when it comes to buying goods. We don’t need menial jobs that pay low wages in this country. We have spent a lot of money to educate people so they don’t have to work menial jobs for low wages. We need jobs that challenge workers and the pay living wages.

Buying inexpensive materials and goods from other countries we put those types of jobs there and have the products to use and raw materials for final manufacturing at a lower cost than if we did the work in this country. We save money and resell those products at a profit, but lower cost.

We create jobs in the secondary outcome of trading with other countries. That system may create a trade deficit, but that is a good thing. Trade deficits mean that a country is saving money because let’s face it, why would a company pay for a product that they could build here for less cost?

Managing a Trade Deficit

Protectionists believe that the United States is the center of the universe. They want to create a trade war with other countries because they believe our country doesn’t need them. It is driven by a racist point of view. Protectionists believe that our economy would be perfect if we didn’t interact with any other country. It is a childish mentality that is fatal in an adult world.

A trade war using taxes and tariffs to prevent trade doesn’t create jobs in the United States. A trade war makes businesses import products at a higher cost and makes other countries angry. A trade war is akin to telling your local grocer that you are going to charge them to allow you to buy food.

Trump is about to ignite a fuse that will blow our country up. The “Art of the Deal” guy isn’t artistic, and he’s giving our country a bad deal.

Pence’s White Greed National Space Council

06 Tuesday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Business, Discrimination, Ethics, Exploration, Generational, Government, NASA, Politicians, Politics, Public Image, racism, Science, Space, SpaceX, Taxes, Technology, United States, US History, US Space Program, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

bigotry, Board certified, Buzz Aldrin, Conservatives, Donald Trump, Eileen Collins, FAA, Mike Pence, NASA, National Space Council, racism, science teacher, SpaceX

Mike Pence, who is Donald Trump’s Number 1, but acts like he’s a Number 2, has recreated the National Space Council in his own image. The purpose of the group of is to channel taxpayers money out of government space program projects and give to the wealthy corporations. He seems blissfully unaware that the 29 member Council has the scientific qualifications, and diversity of race and political ideology of Republican fundraiser in Mississippi.

Pence’s Space Council of Non-Diversity

Mike Pence: The No Science Guy

Pence, who has less charisma and intelligence than former VP Dan Quayle, has put together a Council of primarily investor-owned corporations. No current NASA staff is included, and the former NASA employees on the Council have been retired from the agency an average of over 19 years.

In order to make sure the Council does not get caught up in any science issues, Pence has added five people who were selected because of their politically conservative resume, but devoid of any scientific qualifications.

However, there is one science teacher on the Council. No one seems to know who she is or what her qualifications are, but she is a “Board Certified Science Teacher.”

The National Space Kangaroo Council

The qualifications and interests of the National Space Council members are as follows:

Current NASA Staff (0)

None included

Current FAA Staff (0)

None included

Former NASA Staff (7)

Buzz Aldrin, (Retired from NASA 46 years ago)

Walked on the Moon in 1969, retired from NASA 1971, retired from Air Force 1972, a proponent of space exploration, punched faked-Moon-landing-conspiracist Bart Sibrel in the face (Sibrel had it coming.)

Eileen Collins, (Retired from NASA 12 years ago in May)

Flew Space Shuttle four times, speaker at 2016 Republican National Convention

Homer Hickam, (Retired from NASA 20 years ago)

Former NASA engineer and author

Pam Melroy, (Retired from NASA 9 years ago)

Space Shuttle astronaut, former Lockheed Martin staff, former FAA staff, former DARPA staff.

Harrison ‘Jack’ Schmitt, (Retired from NASA 42 years ago)

Apollo 17 Astronaut and former conservative U.S. Senator. Believes climate change is natural, not human-caused

David Wolf, (Retired from NASA 5 years ago)

Space Shuttle astronaut and physician

Pete Worden, (Retired from NASA 2 years ago)

Former Air Force General and NASA Ames Center Director

Minor Space Background (1)

G.P. Bud Peterson, Served as a visiting research scientist for NASA during summers of 1981 and 1982. Chairperson of the National Science Council and President of the Georgia Institute of Technology

Private Corporations Seeking Taxpayer Money (15)

Tory Bruno, Formerly with Lockheed Martin. President and CEO of United Launch Alliance
Wes Bush, CEO of Northrop Grumman
Mary Lynne Dittmar, Former Boeing employee and NASA advisor, currently President, and CEO of the private space industry advocacy group Coalition for Deep Space Exploration
Former Admiral Jim Ellis, Board of Directors Lockheed Martin, Retired 4-star Admiral, former head of STRATCOM, and member of the Space Foundation Board of Directors
Tim Ellis, CEO of Relativity Space, a corporation seeking to build rockets with 3D printers and using no labor or astronauts
Marillyn Hewson, CEO of Lockheed Martin Corporation
Les Lyles, Only African American on Council, Director for multiple corporations, retired Air Force in 2003 after a long history of working in various military defense missile capacities.
Dennis Muilenburg, CEO of the Boeing Company
Fatih Ozmen, CEO of the Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC) with headquarters in Nevada which doesn’t have income or corporate taxes; however, the operations are in Colorado.
Gwynne Shotwell, President and COO of SpaceX (Space Exploration Technologies Corporation)
Bob Smith, CEO of Blue Origin
Eric Stallmer, President of the Commercial Spaceflight Federation
David Thompson, Founder and CEO of Orbital ATK
Mandy Vaughn, President of VOX Launch Company
Stu Witt, Founder of Mojave Air and Spaceport, former Navy pilot, former Chairman of the Commercial Spaceflight Federation

Conservatives Appointed For Their Political Ideology (No space industry qualifications) (5 + 2 Former NASA)

Dean Cheng, Political conservative working for the Heritage Foundation, a politically conservative organization
Eileen Collins, (See former NASA staff)
Steve Crisafulli, Former conservative politician, Speaker of the Florida House of Representatives
Newt Gingrich, conservative politician and former Speaker of the House
Governor Kay Ivey, Conservative Governor of Alabama
Fred Klipsch, Conservative promoting the defunding of public schools, Founder and Chairman of Hoosiers for Quality Education
Harrison ‘Jack’ Schmitt, (See former NASA staff)

Unknown (1)

Pamela Vaughan, Science Teacher

Maybe we didn’t win the space race after all.

Is There a Planet Nine or Not?

03 Saturday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Astronomy, Exploration, NASA, Science, solar, Space, Technology, US Space Program

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

ecliptic, ninth planet, orbit, Planet Nine, solar plane, solar system, Sun, trans-Neptunian objects

Is there a Planet Nine in our solar system? After Pluto got kicked out of the planet club most of us woke up to the reality that there were only eight planets. There was no reason to believe that some mysterious Planet Nine out there that met the requirements of the club. We would have seen by now, correct?

Planet Nine and other orbits looking from above the solar ecliptic

Nothing New In Planet Discovery

All the planets except Uranus and Neptune were discovered by Babylonian astronomers, although the six innermost planets were most likely noted by humans before writing was invented. Uranus was discovered in 1781, and Neptune was found in 1846. Despite all the advances in telescopes and space exploration no other ‘planet’ has been discovered in our solar system. So, why would anyone think another planet might exist?

Odd Ducks Out There

If the Sun and the planets were formed from a disk of debris, then most objects would be aligned in that disk or solar ecliptic plane, or the plane that the major planets are on as they orbit the Sun. Collisions between asteroids can send them off in unusual orbits that don’t align with the solar ecliptic.

However, there are a group of objects beyond Neptune that have unusual orbits. These objects are called trans-Neptunian objects. These are on a different plane and defy easy explanation. In addition, the Sun itself is a bit odd in its rotation. The Sun seems to rotate slightly off the ecliptic plane that all the planets follow.

Doing the Math

Two astronomers, Chad Trujillo and Scott S. Sheppard, tackled the odd orbits of the trans-Neptunian objects and discovered that some of the orbits of the objects could be explained if there were a large planet farther out in the solar system. That didn’t sit well with other astronomers so they decided to prove them wrong.

Planet Nine’s likely orbit and the orbits of trans-Neptunian objects

Konstantin Batygin and Michael E. Brown from CalTech decided to re-do the calculations of Trujillo and Shepard. They eliminated some of the objects studied because they might be influenced by Neptune’s gravity. That left six objects to study. To their surprise, they discovered that a planet ten times the size of Earth in an off-plane orbit much farther out than Neptune explained the orbits of the six objects to a 99% degree of certainty.

Is There a Ninth Planet?

Despite the mathematical support, there is no Planet Nine…yet. An analogy would be that if someone picked a date ten years in the future, say 3 March 2028, and was asked if that day would fall on a weekday. Without a calendar to look at it would be hard to say ‘yes’ or ‘no.’ It is very likely, but it is not certain until there is proof.

We currently have no proof of another planet, and spotting Planet Nine will be difficult at best. It would be a relatively small target with almost no sunlight reflecting off of it. It couldn’t be seen with today’s telescopes in either the visible or infrared spectrums. Even if we could determine where it is in its orbit, it would take a probe as many as twenty years to get into the Planet Nine neighborhood.

So the answer remains ‘no.’ There is no Planet Nine…but stay tuned.

Pigs In Space: Discrimination on the ISS

01 Thursday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Discrimination, Ethics, Exploration, Government, History, Honor, Management Practices, NASA, Politicians, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, racism, Russian influence, Science, Space, Technology, United States, US History, US Space Program, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Anne McClain, astronauts, bias, crew, discrimination, Expeditions, Female, Gender, International Space Station, ISS, Jeanette Epps, male, misogyny, NASA, racism, Russia, Serena Auñón-Chancellor, Space, United States

For the last 17 years, the International Space Station (ISS) has been the great achievement of the United States, Russia, and other nations working together to maintain a human presence in space. People around the world can look up and see the shining star of the ISS crossing the evening or predawn sky. Yet, ISS has a dark shadow that NASA and the other nations involved don’t talk about publicly. Space has a glass ceiling.

International Space Station not above discrimination

Man Cave In Space

Women have spent less than ten percent of the cumulative days on the ISS since the first crew came on board in October of 2000. In over 17 years, only 12 women have served on an expedition crew. One woman, Sunita L. Williams, served twice, and one, Peggy A. Whitson, served three times.

As of today, (1 March 2018,) women have logged only 2,527 days on the International Space Station compared to 23,493 days served by men. Most of those women have been from the United States with only two women serving from other countries. The problem of discrimination against women is bigger with Russia, as cosmonauts have spent the most time on ISS (47% Russia versus 40% USA) but only have allowed one woman to be part of the crew.

The irony is that women make up 63% of the population of Russia and yet women have had less than 7% of the days served on ISS compared to their male counterparts. The United States has also failed to utilize women as crew members, but at least in the case of the U.S., women have been 21% of the Expedition crew.

Discrimination Station

Jeanette Epps barred from ISS

The problem with the crew discrimination goes beyond gender. ISS has yet to have an African American crew member. Last year NASA announced that Dr. Jeanette Epps would be the first African American crew member before Donald Trump was sworn into office. This January NASA rescinded that decision without explanation. They replaced her with another woman, Serena Auñón-Chancellor, who was scheduled to fly in November.

Epps has been completely removed from the ISS crew rotation even though NASA claims she is still under consideration. It has been confirmed that she was not ill, nor were family issues a reason for removal. NASA has not explained whether Trump’s administration was involved in the decision, nor whether Russia has demanded that the African American woman be barred from serving as a crew member.

However, it is clear that women and minorities are shockingly underrepresented on the space station. The unexplained removal of the first African American crewmember, who also is a woman, reflects a continuation of the ongoing discriminatory behavior of the program.

Gender-Based Crew Selection

NASA has demonstrated that it has a plan for the crew assignment based on gender assignment. Jeannette Epps has a Ph.D in engineering. She was replaced by Serena Auñón-Chancellor who is a physician. Dr. Aunon-Chancellor was pulled off an ISS Expedition scheduled to begin in November 2018, and she was replaced by Anne McClain who is a West Point graduate, Major in the Army, and a pilot with Master’s degrees in Aerospace Engineering and International Relations.

It is obvious that these three women were not shuffled around on the basis of skills, education, nor experience. Epps, and Dr. Aunon-Chancellor were selected to be an astronaut in 2009. McClain was selected in 2013, and completed her training in 2015. None of them have been in space. The only rational explanation is that NASA was replacing a woman with another woman. NASA’s 90% male to 10% female crew assignment is intentional.

Five Versus One

Another issue is the male dominated crew Expeditions. Typically only one woman is assigned to be with five men for six months on ISS. Only twice have two women served at the same time on ISS. For three months in 2010, and three and a half months in 2014-5, two women were on board at the same time. For the rest of the 200 months of occupation, ISS has either had an all-male crew, or only one woman on board.

Lack of Qualified People?

Is it possible that NASA can’t find enough qualified women or minorities? The number of people who dream to be an astronaut may have diminished since Apollo, but the dream hasn’t died.

When less than ten percent of the ISS crew time is served by women, and no African Americans have served in over 17 years of operation it’s clear there is a problem. ISS shouldn’t be the icon of white male discrimination.

SpaceX 2018 Launch Schedule Is PR Gold or PR Nightmare

28 Wednesday Feb 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Exploration, Falcon Heavy, Marketing, Milestone, NASA, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Science, Space, SpaceX, Technology, United States, US History, US Space Program

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

2018, Block 5, commercial space, fairing, Falcon 9, Falcon Heavy, launch, manned space program, manned spacecraft, NASA, space business, SpaceX, Starman, Tesla Roadster, Zuma

SpaceX is dependent on its reputation of success and reliability. There is no room in SpaceX’s 2018 launch schedule for major failures. The successful launch of the Falcon Heavy with a Tesla Roadster as the payload has repaired the long delays of the program, but in the business of space, you’re only as good as your last mission.

SpaceX’s Starman in Earth orbit

SpaceX’s reputation will be determined by the successful implementation of three critical elements of their program. Failure of any of the three elements and SpaceX could be facing a public relations (PR) nightmare; however, success will prove Elon Musk’s lofty visions for the company might be more than just talk.

SpaceX Must Do No. 1 – Consistency in Payload Delivery

The Falcon 9 program has moved out of the novice phase and into the professional phase. The question remains as to whether or not SpaceX can consistently put payloads into orbit.

Landing the booster after these launches dazzles the public, but has no impact on the effectiveness or cost efficiency of the program. Most of the boosters are the previous Block 3 or 4 versions and will not be reused. There is an issue with the booster landings. How long will paying customers accept SpaceX’s waste of resources on the ‘reusable’ PR parlor trick?

The other issue cropping up is the reliability of the fairing on the nose of the rocket. There are persistent issues with the fairing and while SpaceX absolved themselves of the loss of the super secret Zuma satellite, questions still remain as to the role of the fairing release after launch.

SpaceX Must Do No. 2 – Prove Falcon Heavy is Reliable

The inaugural launch of the Falcon Heavy was a spectacular success for SpaceX. The PR kudos continue to pour in with every new sighting by astronomers as the alternate human, Starman, drives his Tesla out further in the solar system.

All that could be lost if the next two 2018 scheduled launches of the Falcon Heavy experience problems. Failed launches of the Heavy would erase much of the PR boost of the first launch and call back into question the wisdom of a 27-engine booster. SpaceX has to duplicate the home run first launch at least twice more before customers will feel warm and fuzzy about the Falcon Heavy.

SpaceX Must Do No. 3 – Success of the F9 Block 5 Version

Block 5 is the final version of the Falcon 9 booster and it goes into service in 2018. It is the booster that will be rated for human spaceflight and much of SpaceX’s future as a commercial space program depends on proving it answers all the concerns of the four previous versions.

NASA is requiring seven successful booster flights of the Block 5 version of Falcon 9 before it will be rated for humans. That means SpaceX has to successfully launch the same version of the booster, without significant redesigns, seven times.

SpaceX has scheduled the maiden and second flight of the Block 5 version for April. It then has to fit five more successful flights between May and November. Once achieved, SpaceX can be approved to send astronauts up on the Block 5 booster in December of this year.

2018 A Year of Glory or Humiliation

Elon Musk has a reputation for promising more than he can deliver. He is a master of overconfidence but now results matter. He knows how to carefully craft a situation to amaze the public.

The Falcon Heavy launch was one of those moments. When they see the video of Starman orbiting Earth in a shiny red Tesla with the top down, people don’t remember that the Falcon Heavy was supposed to be ready in 2013. When they see the first stage of a rocket magically land on the pad, people don’t care that the booster was never going to be reused again.

2018 isn’t going to be a time when showmanship is going to cover up glaring issues. If there are problems meeting this year’s critical goals, people will see the man behind the curtain.

However, if SpaceX manages to achieve these milestones with minimal problems, SpaceX will be the shining star of space exploration.

My Imaginary Interview with Marketplace’s Kai Ryssdal

27 Tuesday Feb 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Economy, Entertainment, Ethics, Journalism, Marketing, Passionate People, Politicians, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, Stock Market, Taxes, Technology, Traditional Media, Writing

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

business news, entertainment, imaginary interview, Kai Ryssdal, Marketplace, National Public Radio, npr

Me: He’s a man who is all business when it comes to business. Kai Ryssdal is the voice of Marketplace, and for the unenlightened, it is a half-hour business news radio show produced and distributed by American Public Media on public radio stations five days a week all over this country. He has been in his current role for 13 years. A graduate of Emery University, then eight years in the Navy, a Navy pilot, worked in the Pentagon, MA from Georgetown, U.S. Foreign Service in Canada and China, even a stint with California Public Radio…tell me, sir, you are a Renaissance Man are you not?

Kai Ryssdal: Host of Marketplace

Kai: I’ve done some things, but I’m not sure what the test is for qualifying as a Renaissance Man.

Me: Fair enough. Since you’ve been in the big chair at Marketplace the show has won some awards. Edward R. Murrow Prize, an Emmy, awards from radio news directors, and some 12 million listeners. What defines the success of your show?

Kai: What defines the success of the show?

Me: When people say Marketplace is a great show because….

Kai: What we do, or at least is our goal, is to make the issue understandable. If we can’t get someone in her or his car listening to our show to have an a-ha moment on the topic we are discussing, we’ve missed the mark.

Me: You’ve said the term ‘Marketplacey’ in other interviews. You’ve described it, I believe, as a type of rhythm, a style that is unique that defines the show. Why does it work?

Kai: I’m not sure I can answer that question. I can tell you that I think it is a style that expresses a serious, but relaxed treatment of the subject matter. It’s not too formal, nor too casual. We try to keep out the political agenda and focus on what is the structure of the problem.

Me: Might some say you trim down the problem too much? Interviews on Marketplace tend to be short and include the view of only one person, correct?

Kai: We try to do a mix of viewpoints, but we don’t try to do the point/counterpoint interviews. We try to break issues down into small components and cover them in several segments.

Me: Is it investigative reporting?

Kai: Not in the sense that we are digging up a secret and exposing it to the world. Our mission is more to educate and illuminate, not uncover.

Me: But doesn’t that mean you control the process?

Kai: I’m not sure I understand your point.

Me: Do you decide what people learn about an issue? Do you shape the issue for the listener?

Kai: Not with a nefarious intent, but we do clear away the clutter of the issue so a person with little or no experience in the subject can understand the details of the problem.

Me: Okay, we’ll have to leave this here. Kai, thank you for your time.

Kai: Thank you.

Hiding Journalists Behind the Paywall

26 Monday Feb 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Branding, Business, Communication, Customer Relations, Ethics, History, Honor, Information Technology, Journalism, Management Practices, Print Media, Public Image, Public Relations, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Stock Market, Technology, Traditional Media, United States, US History, Website, Writing

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

entertainment, investors, journalism, journalism standards, journalists, New York Times, newpapers, News media, news organizations, packaging news, paywall, paywalls, The Wall Street Journal, Washington Post

Several news organizations have blocked their website content behind paywalls. The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post are noteworthy examples. Paywalls are an attempt to force the reader to pay a subscription to access the news articles of the day. The question is what kind of a journalist wants her or his work held captive from the public?

Paywall News Organizations: The Road to Irrelevance

Out of Sight, Out of Mind, and Irrelevant

The thinking of these organizations is that the value of the content behind the paywall will create a desire for the reader to open a wallet and pay them money. The problem with that theory is that information is not ‘owned’ by a news organization, it is only packaged. News is what happens in the world and is reported in the raw on Twitter, Facebook, and all the other free sources on the Internet.

What investor-owned news media attempts to do is make the reader pay for their packaging of the news, not the product itself, and in an age of the Internet, someone else can offer the same product in a different package for free.

For the writer or journalist that creates the packaging of the news, it means that the public can’t see her or his work…ever. If people can’t see your work, you become irrelevant. The best writer in the world risks becoming invisible when all his or her creative efforts are on a pay-to-read basis.

Even those who are willing to pay for the subscription can’t share an article with others when it is behind a paywall. The benefit of readers discussing a journalist’s work is limited to the subset of those who pay-to-read and in a ‘Share’ world, that is a critical shortfall.

Paying Journalists For Their Work Myth

The organizations that inflict a paywall on the reader and the journalists defend the decision by saying:

Someone has to pay for quality journalism!

But that is a lie. The truth is closer to the statement:

Our investors have to suck as much money out of the work of the journalists!

Note the list of news organizations and, according to Forbes magazine, who owns (as of June 2016) the controlling stake in them.

Behind Hard Paywall (all articles pay-to-read)

Wall Street Journal – Billionaires Rupert Murdoch and Lachian Murdoch
The Washington Post – Billionaire Jeff Bezos

Behind Soft Paywall (limited free views)

New York Times – Billionaire Carlos Slim Helu
Wired – Billionaire Donald Newhouse
The New Yorker– Billionaire Donald Newhouse

No Paywall

Bloomberg Businessweek – Billionaire Michael Bloomberg

The people who control these news organizations don’t need to find new ways to pay journalists. They are just using journalists for greed.

News As Entertainment

Journalism is a philanthropic duty. It is not created to generate profit for investors, it is created to provide information to citizens. The transition from journalism to entertainment is strictly about greed.

Few great journalists become wealthy, but great journalists become the keystone to a great society. The fall of our country can be traced, at least in part, to the fall of journalism. If journalism is about making money then journalists are just prostitutes of news.

McDonald’s Shake Machines Legendary Unreliability

17 Saturday Feb 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Branding, Business, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Employee Retention, Lessons of Life, Management Practices, Marketing, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, review, selling, Technology

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

employees, fast food, food machines, ice cream, McDonald's, milkshakes, Nevada, Reno, Restaurant, service, shakes, Shamrock Shakes, supervisors, worker

It may be just me, but something seems to be amiss with McDonald’s shake and ice cream machines. My experience tells me it’s a 50-50 chance the machine will not be working when I order a shake. Guess what? It’s not just me.

The six McDonald’s I visited in Reno, NV, USA

Apparently, the reliability, or lack thereof, of McDonald’s shake machines and ice cream machines are legendary in the fast food world. It’s so bad that last year McDonald’s corporate folks announced they were replacing the ice cream machine in every store.

Shaky Reputation For McD’s Milkshakes

An online search found multiple responses to questions about McDonald’s shake machines. On Reddit, one person asked:

McDonald’s employees: why is the milkshake machine always out of order?

Response from an alleged McDonald’s employee was:

This machine is incredibly hard to keep up and running if you have no idea what you are doing. It turns off automatically around 11 pm. It turns back on in the morning about 4 am. …Once a month it will turn off for it to be cleaned… someone must completely take it apart to clean it. If it is put back together improperly or not clean enough it will shut off after about an hour and you must clean it again.

Former McDonalds Shift Manager

On Quora the responses to a similar question were:

Even for machines that produce products like the McFlurry, the cleaning and maintenance required is such that it is easily among the most hated tasks to be performed… a milkshake or McFlurry is a product that is usually made by the cashier. … Each McFlurry represents an added task… any request for that item represents added work for the employee with no benefit to accomplishing any of their main tasks faster… there is little downside to simply not providing this service when at all possible.

Former McDonald’s Employee

1. Laziness…
2. The cleaning process…
3. …complicated piece of machinery…

Current McDonald’s Employee

McDonald's Shaking Up It's Shake Machine?

The New Shake Machine? At least this one was working.

McD’s in Reno, Nevada

I made nine visits to six McDonald’s restaurants in the Reno, Nevada area this week. All occurred in the afternoon to early evening. I had four instances where the shake machine was out of order; however, in one instance they said it would be ready in a few minutes, and we (my son was with me) scored our first Shamrock Shake of the season at that location.

The three other times that the shake machine was out of order all occurred at one restaurant on three consecutive days. Five other McDonald’s had working shake machines.

Will It Be Hunting Season For the Shamrock Shake?

With the famous Shamrock Shake season coming up, will it be hunting season for those who are seeking the elusive green treat? Probably not. If the one problem location is removed from my unscientific survey, the shake machines at most of the McDonald’s restaurants could be considered reliable during peak hours.

It also seems that based on the comments of past employees, the reliability of the shake machine might be more a question of the quality of the employees and their management. I will certainly be cautious of McDonald’s locations that seem to have shake machine issues because it is likely that their problems are not isolated bad machine maintenance.

Space Exploration Isn’t Profitable, It’s Transformative

16 Friday Feb 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Apollo, Business, Economy, Education, Exploration, Falcon Heavy, Generational, Government, Higher Education, History, Lessons of Life, Management Practices, NASA, Passionate People, Politics, Pride, Saturn V, Space, SpaceX, Taxes, Technology, Travel, United States, Universities, US History, US Space Program

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Age of Discovery, Apollo, Apollo missions, Columbus, economy, Golden Age of Spain, good jobs, jobs, NASA, privatization, return on investment, ROI, Soviet space program, Soviets, Space, space exploration, Spain, Technology, wages

Space exploration ROI (return on investment) sucks. Exploration doesn’t make money, it costs money. It’s not a place for private business. If the question of space exploration is, “What’s in it for me?” you’re asking the wrong question. Space exploration isn’t profitable, but it is transformative.

The five massive Rocketdyne F-1 engines of the Apollo Saturn V first stage booster. Twice the lift of SpaceX’s 27-engine Falcon Heavy

Exploration Creates Economic Growth

In the 15th century, when the government of Spain financed Columbus to explore a new trade route to the markets in Asia, he discovered the Caribbean. He brought back a few captured natives from the Bahamas, some gold, and a few birds. It didn’t pay for the cost of the voyage.

But what came next transformed Spain and Europe. The year of the discovery of the Americas (1492) is considered the start of the Golden Age of Spain. After Columbus first voyage to the new world, Spain continued with more voyages, and eventually the full exploitation of Central and South America. Most historians focus on the resources that were returned to Spain, but what happened at home was even more important.

Shipbuilding entered a new phase of design and construction. Jobs at home created a new wealth for the working class. Craftsmen, as well as sailors, became vital to the needs of the Age of Discovery. That new wealth created secondary jobs, along with new businesses selling imported goods. All of this economic growth was a direct result of the exploration pushed forward by the government of Spain.

Exploration created massive economic growth for decades, but exploration didn’t give an immediate ROI for Spain.

The Model Space Program

Not all space programs are successful. The Soviet space program became mired in conflicts between good science and engineering versus political priorities. The administration was pushed into risky decisions and failure was not without punishment. In addition, new technology was considered a State secret so the development of commercial uses was not an option.

The United States approach for the space program was for the use of non-military government oversight of private contractors. The government remained accountable to the voters, which kept both the government and their contractors in a stable environment for decision making.

The result was a massive increase in highly-skilled, well-paid jobs that created a new wealth for the middle class. Space exploration supercharged the United States economy and created new technology that continued to develop for decades after the Apollo program ended. It was the model space exploration program.

A Failure of Vision

Once the United States had landed on the Moon conservatives and liberals united to kill the space program. Liberals could only see the money being spent to explore space as money that could have been used to help the poor. Conservatives could only see money not going into their pockets. As it would turn out, both viewpoints were flawed.

Money spent on for space exploration created new, high paying jobs that created a need for improved education and pumped billions of dollars into the economy that created new tax revenue that could be used for government programs to help the poor engage in the new economy.

The flood of new money into the economy helped small companies grow dramatically while increasing profits. It didn’t result in the wealthy becoming dramatically richer, but it did create prosperity that helped everyone.

Missing Greatness

Today the United States is wading in a stagnant economy. Wages aren’t growing as fast as prices are rising. The available jobs pay so poorly that they aren’t worth the cost of working them. If we are missing greatness, it is because we are killing our economy with a focus on profit for a few.

The goal of private business is never to create jobs, nor is it to create high paying jobs. Jobs are created when business has been given a mission to accomplish something. Giving tax breaks does not give business a reason to create more jobs, nor pay employees more.

However, if our country made a serious commitment to the goal of expanding space exploration, and funded it with the tax breaks we are giving billionaires, we would see our economy transformed. It is that simple.

Snowpack is No Longer a Viable Water Supply

10 Saturday Feb 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, College, Crisis Management, Education, Generational, Global warming, Government, Higher Education, History, Passionate People, Science, solar, Technology, United States, Universities, US History, Water

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

aquifers, Dr. James E. Church, drought, Global warming, lakes, snow surveys, snowfall, snowpack, snowpack surveys, University of Nevada, UoNV, water level, water management, wet

The Sierra Nevada mountains. In the winter, cold, moist air off the Pacific Ocean is pushed up over them. The air loses the ability to hold the water vapor as it rises up and snow precipitates out. The snow piles up and waits for Spring and as the Summer approaches the warm air melts the snowpack and water flows. That is the source of the water supply for California and western Nevada. Sometimes.

Snowpack: The Alpha and Omega of Western Water Management

Sometimes the snow doesn’t fall. The creeks and rivers dwindle. The water level in the lakes and reservoirs drop and a drought begins. It is a cycle that has repeated many times in the western United States, but not when so many people have been dependent on the annual water flow.

Not Good: CA drought versus wet years

In this part of the country, it is all about the snowpack. If the Sierra Nevada mountains have a good snowpack, there is water. If not, well… This is the model of water management in California and western Nevada and in the last few decades have proven that it is not a good one. Drought is not an exception in the West, but the rule. As the population grows, the Sierra Nevada snowpack becomes the enemy.

Global Warming: Raining on the Snowpack Parade

There is growing problem with the reliance on the snowpack. Global warming. The impact of the Earth’s atmosphere retaining more of the Sun’s energy may be that snowfall may become rare, or non-existent in temperate climates.

March 2010 Snowpack

March 2015 Snowpack

Beyond the issue of drought is the issue of rain versus snow. The West has reservoirs and lakes, but that storage is not enough if the precipitation falls as rain, not snow. Rain also is not as efficient as snow in replenishing the deep aquifers that have been used to supplement the surface water.

Up the Creek With No Water

Drought is the new normal in regions in the West dependent on snowpack. The current response has been to push for water restrictions. This is not a flawed approach as the water users have become accustomed to the mindless waste of fresh water; however, reducing the use of water is not going to solve the problem.

Global warming is causing the precipitation to fall as rain, not snow. If water management in California and Nevada can’t learn to transition off the snowpack model it won’t matter how much water is saved. You can’t reduce the use of water when there is no water to save.

SIDE NOTE: Creator of the Snowpack Survey

On the University of Nevada (UoNV) campus in Reno, Nevada there is a building named the ‘Church Fine Arts Building.’ Some even make the mistake of calling it the Church ‘of’ Fine Arts, which might be appropriate for some who dedicates his or her life to the Arts.

Dr. James E. Church on a snowpack survey

However, the building is named after the UoNV professor, Dr. James E. Church, who died in 1959. He taught Latin, German, and Fine Arts at the university from 1892 to 1939. He was not employed as a scientist at the UoNV; however, Dr. Church invented the snowpack survey that is still used today to determine the water content of the snowpack in the Sierra Nevada range.

It is said that he and his wife’s ashes are in the cornerstone of the Church Fine Arts Building.

Dr. James E. Church

[COUNT TO 500: 499th Article in PAULx]

SpaceX Falcon Heavy Defies the Odds

07 Wednesday Feb 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Falcon Heavy, History, NASA, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Science, Space, SpaceX, Technology, United States, US Space Program

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

asteroid belt, booster, Elon Musk, Falcon Heavy, landing, launch, Mars, orbit, relanding, SpaceX, Tesla, Tesla Roadster, test

I’m not a fan of SpaceX, nor of Elon Musk, but one can only observe yesterday’s Falcon Heavy launch with awe. It was brilliant. One thing that Elon Musk and I agreed on was that the chance it was not going to end in a massive fireball was slim. It is hard to convey how unlikely a successful launch was considering all the factors involved. The people working at SpaceX did at least one trillion things right to achieve the results of yesterday’s launch.

Taken from live feed of Tesla Roadster in orbit

Starman takes a test drive

SpaceX and Musk Had a Great Day

A sample of what went right:

Other than weather, the launch had no delays. That is unusual with a prototype rocket test.
An engine ignited and worked as intended. Multiply that by 27.
A side booster that was essentially a rocket in itself, did exactly what it suppose to do without any new issues common in a prototype test. Multiply that by 2.
The core booster functioned as intended and delivered the second stage and the payload, a Tesla car, into position for a boost into orbit.
A side booster completed a complex task of a powered relanding withing a few meters of the target zone. Multiply that by two.
A side booster was reused from a previous mission. Multiply that by 2.
The second stage booster fired its engines, times three, sending the payload into a heliocentric orbit that will extend beyond Mars, and near the Asteroid Belt.
A team of thousands of people performed their functions in synch allowing the payload to achieve orbit.

Hold My Beer and Watch This

The only small item that did not go as planned was the failed landing of the core booster on the Drone ship. The engineers have determined that only one of the needed three engines for landing had reignited. Until they can analyze the issue, I’m going with the explanation that the core booster was so excited about the success of the launch that it thought it would go for the biggest splash. It was successful.

Regardless, it was a minor misstep in a successful mission-impossible-type achievement.

Bye Bye Starman

Late on Tuesday the second stage of the Falcon Heavy successfully ignited for a third and final time sending ‘Starman’ (the alternate human in the spacesuit) and the Telsa Roadster into a heliocentric orbit that will take it to Mars and beyond. His orbit may last for over a million years, but the car won’t. All the exposed, non-metalic parts of the car will be no match for the radiation, heat, and cold of space. The paint job will suffer as well.

Starman’s out-for-a-drive orbit

Still, the pièce de résistance was the video of Starman in orbit above Earth. I’ll leave you with these images I captured from the live feed. Below that you can watch the video of the launch. Well done, SpaceX.

[COUNT TO 500: 496th Article in PAULx]