hard-boiled



Untitled

ワンダーランド









FollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowed

Theme by spaceperson Powered by Tumblr

klammer
Tagged
nytimes


When the smart guys started this business of securitizing things that didn’t even exist in the first place, who was running the firms they worked for? Our guys! The lower third of the class! Guys who didn’t have the foggiest notion of what a credit default swap was. All our guys knew was that they were getting disgustingly rich, and they had gotten to like that. All of that easy money had eaten away at their sense of enoughness.

Op-Ed Contributor - Wall Street Smarts - NYTimes.com

A pretty interesting theory on how an influx of exceedingly intelligent people screwed Wall St.


06:00 am, by rcmaclean



Google will help you find ways to break bad habits, potentially stop wearing a habit, and kick that crippling Facebook addition.
I refuse to believe that quitting Facebook is a more common search query than quitting smoking or the church. What the hell do I know?
This search was done at the suggestion of the NYTimes.

Google will help you find ways to break bad habits, potentially stop wearing a habit, and kick that crippling Facebook addition.

I refuse to believe that quitting Facebook is a more common search query than quitting smoking or the church. What the hell do I know?

This search was done at the suggestion of the NYTimes.

06:00 am, by rcmaclean

How Fail Went From Verb to Interjection

Great primer for your parents. I’d love to see an NYTimes front page photo with a big FAIL on it. I’d get a Kindle and subscribe to it just for that.

09:38 pm, by rcmaclean10 notes

Q. WHAT WAS THE MOST UNUSUAL QUESTION NASA HAS POSED TO YOU? A. It wasn’t an ethical question, it was a religious one. My father, the late Gerald Wolpe, was a rabbi, as are two of my brothers. There had been an Israeli on the crew of the Columbia shuttle. After it broke up, NASA wanted to know about Jewish religious standards in regard to gathering and interring remains. NASA teams were recovering pieces of bodies on the ground in Texas and Louisiana, much of it unidentifiable. And NASA wanted to know if the Israeli government would want only Ilan Ramon’s flesh returned to it because, if so, NASA would have to do genotyping of every piece of tissue. That would take months. I told them there were countervailing values. In Judaism you bury the body as soon as possible. I didn’t think the Israelis would want to have months and months pass. I’ve since heard that a lot of the tissue buried in the various graves of these astronauts was unidentified. There’s something touching that some of what is buried in each of their resting places is tissue from all of them.

A Conversation With Paul Root Wolpe

Morbid question and answer of the day.

Cool interview though.


08:53 pm, by rcmaclean

There’s a horribly pompous misconception amongst bloggers that they are somehow ‘taking on the mainstream media’….after camera phone dude helps us establish that the plane has crashed, who can we trust to tell us why it happened?

NSFW: Trust me on the sunscreen (and the future of journalism)

Excellent! This is the point I have wanted to make with regard to real journalism.

I am convinced that there needs to be either state funding for journalism or some independent financier needs to make this case to the public. If the Kindle were $150 I’d have a subscription to the NYTimes, Newsweek and The Economist right along side my Atlantic Monthly and Wired.

Seriously, I won’t miss the two page ads and classifieds at all.


10:48 am, by rcmaclean

Relevant or ‘Pure’?

It’s no mystery that the GOP is the butt of the majority of political jokes lately, but they certainly aren’t making it any easier on themselves.

When a relevant voice in your party (Specter) leaves, that should be a sign that you need to be a bit more introspective. There might be something seriously wrong with your party when someone who embraces your party’s ideals leaves because of ideological differences…

What better way to respond than to say that maybe there is more fat in the party to shed.

From the NY Times:

A fundamental debate broke out among Republicans…over how to rebuild the party in the wake of Senator Arlen Specter’s departure: Should it purge moderate voices like Mr. Specter and embrace its conservative roots or seek to broaden its appeal to regain a competitive position against Democrats?

What I really enjoy are unsubstantiated generalities:

“We strayed from our principles of limited government, individual responsibility and economic freedom,” - Chris Chocola

Those are big words coming from a member of the party that has such strong feelings about abortion.

At least a few of them have some brains:

“We are not losing blue states and shrinking as a party because we are not conservative enough. If we pursue a party that has no place for someone who agrees with me 70 percent of the time, that is based on an ideological purity test rather than a coalition test, then we are going to keep losing.” - Senator Lindsay Graham

It would seem like the best of the worst (in my opinion) have their backs against the wall. They need to either sacrifice what they believe to be ideological pinnings that should not be compromised, or simply go down swinging, but certainly go down.

Either way, the floundering, squealing sound of marginalized Republicans will be fun to listen to for at least 3+ years.

02:58 pm, by rcmaclean