web analytics

Blog

  • The Difference Between Rackspace Cloud Sites and Cloud Servers

    This has been on my mind for some time, as I am a customer and reseller of Cloud Sites. I think the simple explanation is like how Steve Jobs explained the difference between Desktops and tablets: “Trucks vs. Cars.”

    Cloud Sites, while being very powerful and very scalable, are more for serving content. This blog post you are reading is being served by Cloud Sites, running WordPress. WordPress and other “CMSs” (Content Management Systems) are perfect for Cloud Sites, being astonishingly easy to use, while being powerful enough to handle all the traffic you can send to it, without crashing.

    Cloud Servers is more for websites that are designed as services. While being perfectly capable of running WordPress and content, for that type of application, Cloud Servers may be overkill, as well as being more technically difficult to set up and maintain (One of the many benefits of Cloud Sites is that all of the technical stuff is actively maintained and managed 100% for you). A services type website (Think Twitter, Facebook, an Online Photo Editor) is a destination people go to do some type of application in the “Cloud” as it were as opposed to running it on their own computer. Yes, I know, Twitter and Facebook are places where you consume content, but they are also services where you create content (in these cases to share). So simply put, “Services” websites are like computers in the Cloud, where a lot of computation power is needed to provide a computational “service” and then output into and from the Cloud.

    So if you have a website designed to inform or display content, go Cloud Sites. If you are planning a computational intensive website, that’s designed to be more of a service to your visitors, Cloud Servers is probably your best bet.

    ————————————————————–

    Since this blog post was originally written and published on RackspaceReseller.com/blog which was a domain I originally ran, but had to take down, I made a photo copy of the one comment that was originally on it before I moved the post over here. Here the photo of the comment:

    dberoffcomment122912

  • How to End Inflation Once and For All

    In Response to this blog post “Why Coke Cost a Nickel for 70 Years” I wrote this comment:

    “Same reason the price of oil was basically the same from 1920-1970, even through the invention of automobiles and Jet Airplanes! It’s because Nixon closed the London Gold window in 1971. That’s the whole and only reason for inflation, lack of a Standard unit of Account. We don’t need a Gold Standard because then there wouldn’t be enough liquidity, but we do need a Gold barometer to tell the Fed how much liquidity the economy needs at any one moment in time.”

    What this means is that the Fed should target the price of Gold as far as adding or subtracting liquidity into the economy as whole. Gold is the most Stable Unit of Account for a whole host of Reasons, too numerous to write down here.

    So how does one target Gold? Once the target has been decided, let’s say for the sake of argument $1000 per ounce. Then, if the price of Gold moves above that target, that means that there is too much liquidity awash in the market. So at that point the Fed would sell bonds to sop it up. Same thing in reverse: If the price of Gold goes below the target, that means the economy doesn’t have enough liquidity, and at that point, the Fed would purchase bonds or T-bills, to add liquidity, i.e., add fuel to a growing economy.

    So an economy can grow without any inflation. In fact, growth creates more efficiencies and innovation, which cause the prices of all things to come down, in “real” terms, without any inflation or deflation, needing to come into the picture.

    It’s as simple as that.

  • The Government Was the Cause of the Financial Meltdown of 2008

    There were three causes, and all were the government driven:

    1. The Congress – The Community Re-investment Act. This is what gets me: Everyone thinks it was lack of regulation that caused it. The regulation in the form of this act forced them to lend to everyone and everybody! I mean how much more ironic can it get than that? Do you think bankers in a free market are going to lend their money to people who don’t have the means to service the debt? The regulation caused the meltdown, not the lack thereof.
    2. Freddie Mac – This is a government entity. It’s billed as a “quasi” half government/half privatized enterprise. But it’s all government. Created by congress to buy the loans and package them as securities that could be sold to other Financial institutions. Now why in the World would anyone want to do that? Supposedly to create more liquidity in the mortgage market, in order to do the very thing that everyone rails against now: Encourage more people to buy more homes! So banks could sell them their loans taking the risk of loaning off the table, and Financial institutions were willing to buy them because they knew that they were backed by the Federal Government. Freddie had a seemingly endless supply of liquidity to make good on its losses, until the hole became to big to cover up, so big that it even made a dent on the Government’s ability. Then someone had to be found to blame.
    3. The Federal Reserve – The creator of money itself. When a private company is creating the money for the Government, but not doing anything of value for that money, then lending it out at interest, thus making a profit from the whole economy by not doing anything, how do you think that is going to turn out?

    So the Federal Reserve is the drug grower, Freddie was the dealer, and Congress was the Police, who not only didn’t stop it, not only turned a blind eye to it, but encouraged it to go on! Okay, well you got me on the last one: The Federal Reserve is a private agency, but it’s existence and it’s operations are all under the protection of the Government.

    —————————————————————————–

    This poppycot editorial by the nitwit David Brooks in the NYtimes today, “The Party of Work,”  got me all stirred up to write this. I was going to write a comment, but guess what? Comments were closed! Ha! Oh, I wonder why?

    Oh, and Asians, broke 3-1 against Romney because of his stupid demonizing of China, threatening trade sanctions, etc.

    As much as I was dissappointed by the elections, the reality is, Romney was clueless. At best he was clueless, at worst he was another puppet of the Neo Cons, and not only would have started trade wars with Asia, but actual wars with Iran, Syria, you name it. Sure he would have been a Capitalist at home, but Romney was the “Forbes” candidate. You ever read Forbes? They’re great on economic policy, but man, their Foreign Policy is horrifying.

    Plus, Obama won’t be able to get any more of his socialist programs through with this Republican House. And after two more years of this misery, the Senate will flip. Then two years after that, the Presidency, unless the Republicans continue to nominate people who are Neo Con puppets.

    I know what you are saying: But Obamacare will now come into effect! Yeah, and that’s bad, but here’s the deal, and I think it’s very enlightening to see, in part, why Romney lost: During the Primaries, Romney was vehement about repealing it. During the actual Presidential debates, he said, he wanted to, but didn’t know if he could now! Now, who’s going to go out and vote for a guy like that? Exactly.

    Bob Beckel, on O’Reilly the other night said it best: “People don’t go out to vote against someone. The go out to vote FOR someone.” Romney was an empty suit, that no one was energized to vote FOR.

  • If Everything is Made of Atoms Who or What is Doing the Seeing?

    If everything is made of atoms, who is it that is doing the seeing, the feeling. Atoms don’t have eyes, so who or what is it that is doing the seeing? It’s striking how much that galaxy looks like an atom. Infinite Worlds above, Infinite Worlds below, and your wave function exists in all of them simultaneously, forever.

    Richard Feynman said that the greatest discovery in history is that everything is made of atoms. That made me think of this. My entire body and everything around me is made of atoms, or more precisely three primary constituents, protons, neutrons, and electrons. So that’s what drives me to ask the question “Who or what in me is doing the seeing?” If you say the neurons, which is a collection of atoms arranged in a specific way, it makes me think of an instrument like a camera. But does the camera have consciousness? It collects photons through a lens and arranges them in a pattern. But until we look at the photo, does anything happen? And even when we do, again who is doing the seeing? Because we are made up of exactly the same three ingredients as the camera, only arranged in a different way.

    Update: 10/13/12: As I was stirring my coffee today, the white powdered sugar at the top, as it was swirling around looked just like a galaxy. As I stirred harder the middle of the white froth started to sink in the middle reminding me how space curves inward from gravity. It reminded me that gravity is simply energy. In this case my “Mini” galaxy was spinning from the energy of my hand being transferred to the coffee. So the coffee was like the fabric of space itself. But what I was curious about was although I knew the energy was there and causing the sugar to swirl, I still wondered why the swirling energy made the coffee suck downward in the middle. The coffee wasn’t being sucked downward due to gravity. It was being sucked downward by the swirling energy. Was it only being sucked down because the energy of my straw was pushing the coffee outward towards the sides of the cup? So is gravity not really a force in and of itself but merely the after effect of energy pushing space outward? In that case then somehow this energy pushing space outward must cause a vacuum within Hyperspace (some Physicists refer to this as “The Bulk”) that sucks the the fabric of space inward towards the bulk itself. Interesting. So Hyperspace itself must be causing the attractive force of gravity. Really, when you think about it the “sucking” of gravity is caused by energy moving a portion of space towards the “wall” of Hyperspace (aka the wall of the cup) and so the middle of that portion of space loses its volume and moves away from Hyperspace (In this case the Hyperspace is like the surface of the cup of coffee.)

     

     

    Related Posts:
    Qualia Principles: The Foundation For A Science Of Consciousness – DeepakChopra.com

    And if you have a Facebook, it was this photo/post from Deepak that sparked this thought of mine.

  • The Biggest Problem the World Faces: No Stable Unit of Account

    Here’s the best way to put it: Quantitative Easing (QE) is like saying that simply feeding a guy will make him exercise more. It doesn’t. It just makes him more fat (inflation). On the other hand, someone who is working out and growing muscle (ie, a metaphor for a growing economy) does need to be fed more (i.e. in economic terms this is the time to increase liquidity) or else his body won’t have the energy or building blocks to create the new muscle (i.e., analagous to derailing a growing economy by raising interest rates and choking it.) Either way, whether we have growth or recession, we can’t win. And that’s why we have continual crisis after crisis, at a time in our Civilization’s history when there should instead be a Cornucopia of Abundance for all and a Golden Age.

    The sole mandate of the Federal Reserve, or any “Central Bank” should be to keep the supply and demand of liquidity (a fancy word for money) in balance. If there’s too much supply in relation to demand, then you get inflation. And this is the ONLY cause of inflation. They would have you believe that growth causes inflation, and that inflation is somehow a ‘natural’ occurence. But growth in no way causes inflation. Because growth causes an increase in production as much or even more so than it does in consumption. Growth also causes innovation with increases in productivity and efficiency. They try to make you believe that inflation is a natural occurance so that they can keep their jobs, their huge budgets, and their elevated status in society of some kind of Knights continuously “fighting inflation.”

    On the other hand if demand for liquidity outstrips supply, which is the case usually during economic booms, not only does this cause ‘deflation’ but even worse it chokes off the “air supply” of much needed liquidity and kills the boom in it’s tracks. An example of this would be the late nineties economic boom caused by the Internet boom that went suddenly bust in 2000, not because of failed business plans, but because the air supply was cut off. An example of the deflation of that period was when oil hit $10 a barrel.

    So, the Federal Reserves actions not only cause and unstable unit of account, they actually cause the downturns and “Financial Crises’” that seem to be a continual part of our lives, which is so ironic considering the times we live in: Technology and Science, whose knowledge and actual physical products are doubling in power and efficiency every 12-18 months, driving productivity increases throughout every area of our economy. Indeed, under such salutary conditions, it should be impossible to have any kind of economic crisis. There must be something that is throwing a monkey wrench, so to speak, in our economy, and unnaturally derailing it.

    The biggest problem in the United States and the World is that adding Monetary Liquidity doesn’t stimulate economic activity. It only causes inflation. And through inflation, it actually sludges up and slows the economy even more. That’s the biggest problem that the World faces: is that we don’t have any Standard Unit of Account.

    Only three things can increase economic activity: An increased appetite for risk, more work, or more efficiency, which is usually supplied through innovation.

    People are only going to work more if there is a financial incentive (unless they are one of the lucky few who love their work so much, that they’d rather be doing that than what they like to do in the free time. This is why a lot of people advise that whatever it is that is your hobby, you should consider making into your career. Or the other famous phrase that’s been used so much that it’s almost lost its meaning: ‘Do what you love.’ Or Joseph Campbell’s famous phrase: “Follow your Bliss.”)

    So, basically, the only way to achieve this kind of productivity, is through fiscal policy, reducing the amount of tax upon physical work. Allowing workers to keep more of what they earn.

    Increasing productivity through efficiency is intimately tied to innovation, which not always, but almost always is tied to the first part of the equation, which is an increased appetite for Capital Risk. This second part can only be achieved fiscally as well. A decrease or elimination of all unnecessary regulation (ie, regulation that is not helping or protecting the public) and a lowering or completely zeroing out of the Capital Gains tax. Indeed, many Economists believe (Alan Greenspan being one, I think) that the no. 1 impediment to raising the standard of living for all is the Capital Gains tax.

    This is not a tax on merely the “Wealthy.” For taxing Capital Gains directly decreases the amount and the rate of innovation in every area of society and the economy, which has a direct impact on the standard of living for all. Also, the Capital Gains tax is applied to every amount. So if a middle class or lower middle class person makes, say $1000 on a successful use of his mind and productive flow of capital into an area of growth in the form of a successful investment, he is taxed the same rate as someone who makes a million. And one could argue that the $300 confiscated from him is more of a discouragement as well as a practical harm, from a day to day living standpoint, than the $300,000 confiscated from the Wealthy person.

    And what is more is that it’s the millions of thousand dollar investments that make up a much more huge majority of the nations Capital markets than the few million dollar investments. Whether they are in the form of a stock certificate on Wall Street or a small business on Main.

     

    Related Links:

    I wrote a comment to this Yahoo post:
    “So true. Monetary “Stimulus” doesn’t stimulate anything except inflation. There’s no evidence of it ever stimulating economic activity or “growth.” The only way to create a runway for growth and jobs is to maintain a stable unit of account, which should be, in fact, the only mandate of a Central Bank. “

  • The Law of Detachment

    The Law of Detachment:

    “If you get attached to the outcome, you won’t be in the process.” – Deepak Chopra

    “Life is a metaphor for what’s happening in our consciousness.” – Deepak Chopra

    I guess I should add this to my “Consciouness Quotes” page, or my “Deepak Chopra Quotes” page. I don’t know about you, but whenever I’m watching something or reading something that I’m interested in, it could be anything: Science, Spirituality, Entertainment (the fact that we feel the need to ‘categorize’ everything speaks volumes about the state of fragmentation our consciousness is, indeed, in.), there’s always one or two things that really “Hit home” with my “Subconscious” or my “Archetypal Instinct.” I feel the need to write these down, to remember them.

    I wish I could find a way to organize them in a better way, but for now the spontaneity of a blog post will have to do.

     

    Related: