aliseya

a few highlights of my career

noreply@blogger.com (techdiva) — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 23:00:00 +0000

in the last 10 years, like most people, i've seen and done more than i can fit on a resume...most of which isn't directly relevant to the next job i want, so it's easy to leave off...

but here's my top 10 list of things i've seen/done. in no particular order.

1) Gone to a barbecue at bill gates house in mercer island. yes he was there. yes it was his real house. it's something he does with M$ interns. so yes, i was a M$ intern...way back when. I asked him how he knew leaving school and starting a company was the right choice. His answer is what KEPT me in school. I was not sitting on his opportunity, with his EXPERIENCE and his funding, personal and otherwise.

2) had a business reason to talk to execs at record labels. during my party days i was also doing a web consulting company. so i was able to go to some super swanky events and have something to say to oh, Jay Z when i ended up in the room with just him. Something that wasn't 'i like your music'

3) got to chat with Max Levchin about why he founded slide. how so? i interviewed there when it was early stage enough that the CEO would be involved in the hiring. when in the room with one of the founders of PayPal...of course I'm going to pick his brain about what he sees as an interesting business opportunity. Going to Y! over Slide was actually one of the hardest decisions, professionally, I've had to make. Two very different opportunities, both with major pluses.

4) Following Adam Blum around for a few years, doing whatever bitch work he asked me to. A lot of work, but a great career move because right out of school...you don't even know what you don't know yet. And I had someone willing to say, code this...trust me you need to know it. yes, big companies usually have some kind of engineering rotation that introduce you to this...but it'll take longer. Also, he has zero tolerance for bullshit engineers. zero. what's the benefit in that? the other devs he put me around, schooled me in something. i'm a much better dev today because of that.

5) Going to Berkeley. It's a CEO/Nobel Prize/Innovator/other kind of genius parade over there. get your head out of the lab and you have access to so many leaders in tech it's almost opportunity overload. Of the many people I talked to, I really appreciate Eric Brewer taking the time to discuss Inktomi and what was behind their success. Everyone sees the publicity and the press releases about successful companies and acquisitions, but being at Berkeley gives you the opportunity to dig a little deeper.

6) Taking Andrew Isaac's classes in Haas. I need to give him a call again to thank him. At 25, I was going thru career angst...which I'm really only working out now...I know where I want to end up...and I probably won't get there until around 40. But when you're young...and in the valley, that sounds like a death sentence. If you participate in his clases and his programs, you get your eyes opened to so many people that are where you want to be, including him. And in a non-hostile environment where they are receptive to answering your questions.

7) Shipped products that half the world uses at Y!. Really take the mystery out of it. I don't look at the web and think, i'm not yet ready...which makes me hard to interview. i'm like, you want to see if i can write stable code...here go to www.yahoo.com. there it is. next fucking question. and no, i can't recite to you exact fucking syntax for how to render an image in actionscript unless i just did it last week. so stop asking me questions an IDE will answer for you. </rant> if you can't tell, i despise sadistic tech interviews.

8) working in a culture of nice. nice only works, when it's balanced with extreme competence. nice + sub par engineers = failed execution. why is this a highlight? i've seen it firsthand. i know better than to be nice while the product fails in preventable ways.

9) bumping into the then CTO of intel while interning there. i didn't talk to him. it was the impression he left. his suit was not impressive. his head was down because he was in thought. in short, he was a tech geek. that's what you want in a CTO. CTOs that don't know and love and breathe tech are a total fail. save that for you CEO. winks. but i think that can be a fail too. depends on the rest of the team. and the VCs. i'm looking at you facebook. actually i won't be snarky. i've never met mark zuckenberg. he might be brilliant. and i might just be a hater. although i would have DEFINITELY sold for $1B. so i'm totally hating on not having the opportunity to consider a $1B offer.

and

10) seeing the silicon valley hustle first hand. if you think you've seen full of shit you should see some of these start ups 'value propositions'. but the difference is, they hustle for millions, and are smart enough not to brag about how they got one over. from a distance you think they really believe the bullshit they are selling. a few do, most don't. they just know the game. I had one tell he me how he positioned his company for an overvalued acquisition because he knew it was time to exit the market... Bravo. well played sir. well played.

So why did i subject you to this list? it's part of my continuing effort to count my blessings and remain in state of gratitude for the opportunities that life has presented me with.

that is all.

thinking happy thoughts

noreply@blogger.com (techdiva) — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 19:21:00 +0000

i'm going to try to keep my snarky, sacrastic comments out of this one.

one second please while i put on my rose colored glasses.

so, like everyone else, i watch the news. wow. the world is nuts. people are under such high levels of stress.

but like google, there's no recession in my world. yes, you can hate me now. but not too much, because there are higher taxes...so i'm doing my part. damn it, there's that cynicism!

but anyhow, the point is, despite the madness in the world, i'm making a conscious effort to not get bogged down in the muck of it all. i do what i can in my space and with the people I come in contact with. throw some money at charities and hope they are not too corrupt and that the poster children actually get fed (there's that cynicism), and generally try to do no evil. no active evil. why does this matter? because i have no guilt about what i have or how i've earned it, so i don't lay awake a nite thinking i'm stepping on others to get to the top. i'm not up that high anyhow.

could i be greener. ya. could i save more whales? probably. could i wear a save darfur and pretend like i care (ah, that cynicism is so sneaky)? fo sho. but despite not having achieved hippie-activist-perfection, i'm making an active point to not get bogged down in the madness. of course i feel empathy for the suffering of others. but when i focus too much on what the news tells me to care about, it becomes easy to lose site of the fact that i have so many good things surrounding and it's rather silly to not enjoy them. i have a great husband, a gorgeous baby, a new baby on the way, the best nannies i could have ever hoped for, family close enough to visit even if it's not as often as i'd like, the freedom to blog about whatever i want. nasty or nice. religious freedom. stability despite the madness. and on and on. i won't bore you with my list. the point is, i've made choices to build stability and security, and to surround myself with people i enjoy. the world is nuts, but i'm going to enjoy my bubble. it's madness not too.

that is all.

diaper bins...the thrill of it all

noreply@blogger.com (techdiva) — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 20:37:00 +0000

ah yes, today i'm going to subject you to my opinions on diaper bins. don't worry - it's not long.

So, after having bought and fought with a diaper genie, i'd have to say just get a garbage can with a lid that shuts tight to keep smells in.

here is a site with some reviews on them. note the diaper genie did not make it into the best-of-the-best list.

as it shouldn't. it's okay. it gets the job done, but if you let it get too full..and try to stuff just onnnnnnneeee more diaper in, it'll break. you can repair it, but you have to get out the screwdriver to do so. who want's to do that?

what's that you say? who will be retarded enough to overfill a nasty diaper bin. your husband. that's who. well maybe not your husband, but my husband. that's why i make mine fix it.

now his solution is to leave the dirty diaper on the floor next to the diaper bin. in his world, the problem is solved. no more broken diaper genie. in my world, we have new problems. diaper next to the diaper genie totally defeats the purpose. at least my pregnant nose alerts me to when there is a stray diaper on the floor that i need to go find. ah well. pick and choose your battles i guess.

real solution - skip the genie and get a nice garbage can with a lid. one that won't break on you for actually using it!

a mortgage is to be paid off...

noreply@blogger.com (techdiva) — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:48:00 +0000

long sigh. the financial news is just so depressing these days. mainly because short term greed is causing people so many problems. and i feel for them. i really do, so as my PSA for the day, i'll keep it short.

a mortgage is to be paid off before retirement. not refinanced with cash pulled out to buy . there is nothing you should pull cash out of your house to buy. maybe, possibly, someone will show me an example where i say okay.... i guess so. but probably not, my answer will most likely be, you should have had cash savings, OR you should get some other kind of financing for that.

anyhow, here's a quote from mish's blog:

The expectation once was to pay off your 30-year mortgage before you retired, or come close. Instead, the level of indebtedness among older Americans has risen faster than in any other age group, partly because so many obtained second mortgages to take money out of their homes.

the post is about seniors needing to work to pay their mortgages.

wow, think about that. needing to work at 71, to pay a mortgage. that sucks. that's the anti-retirement plan.

so the point is thus.

if you have a mortgage. pay it off before retirement. then don't refinance. at the very late late late days of your life, perhaps do a reverse mortgage. but only when the end is nigh, and you can see the pearly gates approaching.

otherwise, you face having to work when you should be chillaxin in your paid off pad.

that is all. just a friendly heads up. because the bankers will of course encourage you to refi. to fund their retirements.

a mortgage is to be paid off...

noreply@blogger.com (techdiva) — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:48:00 +0000

The expectation once was to pay off your 30-year mortgage before you retired, or come close. Instead, the level of indebtedness among older Americans has risen faster than in any other age group, partly because so many obtained second mortgages to take money out of their homes.

yet another opinion

noreply@blogger.com (techdiva) — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 20:46:00 +0000

to vaccinate or not to vaccinate.

we're delaying vaccinating for some, and flat out rejecting others.

hep b vaccine. for a baby? who is my baby f-ing? i need to have a chat with little miss mya about her slutty ways.

tenanus. yes.

chicken pox. probably not.

anyhow, i won't run down the entire list the point is, vaccines aren't a yay or nay across the board thing. some diseases are more serious than others. some, if you get them, it's discomfort, but you'll live. some you won't.

but here is my point. don't take my random ass opinion. who the hell am i. go look up the research. avoid opinion articles. anything that looks like a blog is not what you want. like this. go to pubmed. go to google scholar. look for real research. i won't provide a spoiler here, but research is finding links between certain things and significantly increased rates of autism. if i tell you here, it's just a random ass opinion. so find the research where they did the studies.

and if you don't have a doctor that will let you discuss these things, not from a fear based, all medicine is bad POV, but from a, doc, i need more information, and i don't want to be rushed into a decision because the CDC sez so, find a new doctor.

so that is it. avoid random ass opinions. especially from celebrities. because nothing will make your doctor tune out faster than hearing, but jenny mccarthy said...she might be right...but if so, research will back it up, and find a doctor you can discuss things with.

damn, i dont' want to disclose our pediatricians name, because she's awesome and there's already a 10 week wait to get in to see her. but i will. for those of you in berkeley, check out Dr. Katya Gerwin. She's a harvard trained, science loving, yet roll your own granola crunchy mother, who has definite opinions, backed by experience and research. and despite her expertise, she'll listen to your concerns. and work out a plan that works for you. since if something goes wrong, it's your ultimate responsiblity. for example, after reading some journals and discussing with dr. gerwin...warning - random ass opinion coming.... we have decided that there are some vaccines we definitely want to do. but not until mya's vitamin D levels are sufficiently high.

ya, that's our plan. totally non standard.

do i recommend it for you? no. i recommend you regard this as another opinion worth looking into, and then look into what the research says.

geek stuff.

noreply@blogger.com (techdiva) — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 04:15:00 +0000

so i was having a problem with firefox that wasn't answered on any of the blogs/forums i could find. BOO! i hate when that happens.

so the problem was, every time I started firefox, it would create a new profile. Which ends up using up a ton of your memory. And also, makes it hard to use Charles. And your history/bookmarks are always lost. Well, they are not lost. But your profile is never reused, so they are not loaded. I know...such a geek technicality. sorry.

anyhow, it took a few hours. but i fixed it. as my contribution to tech, here are the details.

enjoy.

http://flash.aliseya.com/2009/10/firefox-creating-new-profile-on-each.html

long sigh. you can't legislate intelligence

noreply@blogger.com (techdiva) — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 19:37:00 +0000

http://finance.yahoo.com/techticker/article/352782/American-Consumer-Rights-Under-Siege,-Nader-Says

problem: boo hoo, i got charged too many overdraft fees because i can't spend less than i earn, and i still bank at a bank that charges me high fees every time the dog sneezes because i haven't taken the time to switch to a credit union. i worse yet, i still believe the marketing bullshit banks put on billboards about caring about me and my dreams. boo hoo. save me from my stupidty.

proposed solution: we'll use your tax dollars to create a new agency, that will advise banks to lower fees. banks will ignore such advice. you will still pay the fees and now you will also pay for this agency.

if you want a regulatory agency to protect you from your own inability to balance your checkbook, read this line out loud slowly.

EYE HAM WE TODD IT

i need to sell out and become a politician. i'm almost that jaded.

an interesting article

noreply@blogger.com (techdiva) — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 23:16:00 +0000

i'm not going to preface this one. i'll just say, read it to the end. it's interesting. and whether you agree with it or not as always, i just encourage you to think. and think about your thoughts. you won't die just because you listen to an idea you don't agree with. worst case scenario, you'll just have to clarify your arguments and positions. even in your own mind.

it makes for better democracy.

http://uselessdissident.blogspot.com/2008/11/interview-with-yuri-bezmenov.html

deliver unto me, a truly free market.

noreply@blogger.com (techdiva) — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 23:30:00 +0000

i'll keep this short. and to the point.

when you say the banks, unfairly getting bailed out is an example of free markets failing, you are misunderstanding what a free market is. in a free market, the banks would have been allowed to fail. individual investors would have been protected to a certain extent by the FDIC until it ran out of money, and large institutional investors would have lost a ton, as they were insured by AIG. oh, is that why they got soooo much money. why they went from being unknown to the individual investor to being front page news. yes.

in a free market, the government would not have stepped in and given tax dollars to the entities of their choosing. the anointed. on a side note, were our currency backed by gold, the government could not have done this. because they'd have to go GET more gold first. when economists say, lets return to a gold standard, it is not because they are living in the past. or because the have huge personal reserves of gold, it is because gold cannot be created out of thin air. you cannot arbitrarily inflate the money supply and give the new money to the anointed of your choosing. it is a check on power.

but pause for a second and think about that power. the power to create money. where there was none. and give it to whomever, individual entity or corporate entity, you choose. powerful stuff there. of COURSE we'll never go back to a gold standard. power of this nature does not willingly contract.

so, anyhow, i understand your outrage at the bailouts. and the fact that our intelligence is insulted daily by politicians saying they are trying to protect the average american only makes it worse. the average american does not get $50 million dollar bonuses. the average american probably did not get a bonus last year, if they were even still employed. the average american gets thrown a bone to keep them content while on the backend is getting charged for the privelage of recieving this bone.

so i understand the outrage. i feel it too. however, attacking policies that were not at fault, is not productive. the free market did not fail you, because the free market, in this case, never really existed. capitalism did not fail you, because capitalism would have let the bankrupt companies die their natural deaths if no buyer stepped up.

we the people, Inc. stepped up. and in my opinion that is the failure. the failure was in the fact that some entities were deemed worthy of being saved, while others, mainly individual families, were not deemed worthy. and that is not how a free market operates. i will not throw out a term here like fascism, or third way economics, mainly because there isn't strong consensus about what that means, so a label will distract from the actual definition. the point is, the free market did not speak. the free market did not decide. the free market was circumvented because the powers that be decided that it should be so. were they right? were they wrong? history will have it's opinion. and i'm not issuing judgement here. i'm just stating, what went down, was not free market economics. not by a long shot. nor was it capitalism.

micheal moore, you are a filmmaker, not an economist. in the words of the Rock, know your role...actually, it's more important that we, those on the hook for the debts of we the people, inc. know his role and look at him as an entertainer, not an educator. a movie based on true economic theory would have been boring. and wouldn't have made him a millionaire once again. micheal moore operates in a free market. in a capitalist enterprise where the owners get to enjoy the profits of their labors. one in which we, the market, get to decide whether or not we support his product. where there are no subsidies granting it to those that cannot afford it on their own. his is an enterprise where a business failure is just that. nothing political. no spin saying the world as we know it will come to an end, should micheal moore inc, not be able to pay it's bills. his is a free market enterprise. albeit one with a steep barrier to entry. those that he criticizes are not. he's a man that knows how to fill the seats. hollywood at its capitalist finest.

and it seems to work out quite smashingly for him. he can bite the hand that feeds him and still get fed. because people like his product. and people hate his product, yet still willingly pay to see it, so that they can trash it later. viva free fucking markets.

on another day, maybe i'll make his actual argument for him and discuss the balance between for profit, not for profit, and gov' run. but that won't be short.

compared to a 1000 page book on economic theory, this was.

on keeping baby costs down.

noreply@blogger.com (techdiva) — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 21:00:00 +0000

so this is my trademark sage advice on parenting. because like with everything in my life, after just 6 months, i am now an expert. certified.

ha. actually, my advice is actually to tell you you don't need most of the crap the experts say you do. do what is healthy and makes sense. if you stroll thru babies-r-us, there are about 10,000 products that you MUST have or else your little one will be a deprived child.

actually, they don't need much. put the baby in your bed. give them a boob from time to time and wipe the poo off of them. anything else is extra and can be looked at as such. do they need a boppy? no. it saves your back, but a blanket works just a well. do they need a special infant bassinet stroller that they will grow out of at 6 months. gosh no. get a normal one that reclines so that they can lay flat? but what about gazing into their eyes as we stroll. look at the road. trust me, you'll have endless time to gaze at your bebe. if you want to get one, great. good for you. but i'm just saying, don't put it into the necessity category and go brizoke for it. i will not bail you out.

what about outfits? oh gosh, by they time you've gotten around to washing the first ones, they've grown out of them. don't splurge now. get one nice thing for photos and the rest should be inexpensive and minimal. because in 4 weeks, it won't fit. yes, it's that fast.

what about strollers. i need 5. one for each stage. do your research. get one. i got the baby jogger citi mini. i LOVE it. i chose it over the bouge-a-boo. because i'm not spending a G on a stroller. i have gucci bags to buy.

what about toys? ya. get some. but kids don't really need that much stuff.

and my FAVORITE. what about "your baby can read". i MUST have that. i MUST give my child all the advantages possible. shrug-a-roo. i say, find out what phonics is. google it. and then make some flash cards. most of your child's brilliance is determined by genetics anyhow. hopefully you didn't mate with that hot-as-hell-dumb-as-bricks. dude. no DVD set can overcome that. ya. i said it. but the point is, you don't need a $300 system to teach your kid how to read. my mom was broke, so she made her own dick and jane books. and i was reading at 2. same for other early readers i know. yes, a reading system is nice. but you don't NEED to spend $300 to get the same results.

so that is all. there is so much pressure to get all of these things. that don't really matter. and will be used for such a short time. if you're flush with cash, great. but if not, the point is, don't beat your self up about not being able to get something. normally there is a much less expensive solution. but it's not being marketed to you. so ignore the peanut gallery and do what works for you.

that is all.

a monday rant

noreply@blogger.com (techdiva) — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 20:40:00 +0000

i wish i were one of those types that bounded out of bed on mondays ready for the week. but i'm not. i lament my weekend lost. or is it my youth lost.

anyhoo. since it's monday, and i'm cranky feel free to stop reading now.

so my annoyance for the day is all the products to improve women. as if perfection needed improving upon. i would feel different if men were equally harassed. but they are not. as an example, just to be moisturized to a socially acceptable level, i spend about $50/month on lotions. while my fiance, i doubt even owns one bottle. no i'm lying. he has one bottle. that he refers to when i ask him why he doesn't moisturize. you're going to get wrinkes you know. but he doesn't care. because he's a man, and men have the luxury of aging. RANT. BITCH. MOAN. anyhow, back to this one bottle. it's kiels. which you can only get at nordies, or at the kiels store in valley fair. i know he's not at either of these places. ha. as-if. so I KNOW the bottle of kiels is the SAME bottle he's had for the last 2 years that i know of. probably longer since i'm sure it was bought for him by some ex-girlfriend. so, what is my solution to this inequality? make him metro? well. if it weren't so much constant nagging i would. and THAT, a page later is the gripe. men have all these companies, with their marketing departments, nagging us women for them, making us feel we must buy all this shit. in order to be desirable. to make us soft and lovely and sexy.

and it does make us soft and lovely and sexy. and i say its worth the money. it's civilized. but can we get some insecurity equality? can i see non-stop ads targeting men and __their__ stinks and scales? can they at least not revel in it? can they en masse, develop ego complexes about said stinks? and then, once that is accomplished, i want to see you sell them some BS self help/empowerment books to let them go back to being *okay* with the perfection in the imperfection.

that is all. that is my rant.

make me happy. sell some ball-wrinkle cream for $100/oz. and make it lemon-spring-blossom scented.

to walk away...

noreply@blogger.com (techdiva) — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 18:57:00 +0000

oh there are so many things i want to blog about today. i could blog about kanye taking the mic from taylor swift, but i have nothing new to add to that discussion. i could talk about the 4th, debatable F, but i'm not in the mood for that, so i'll save that for later, or i could again talk about obamacare, and how it's strange that there was a huge march against it, but i haven't seen any mainstream news coverage of it. the streets were full. that's news. but i'll save that for a day when i have more energy. for today, i'll talk about underwater mortgages, bitchass HOAs and walking away. not just any mortgage. mine.

So, my mortgage is underwater. listen to the county of alameda and what they want me to pay in taxes and it's $100,000 underwater. listen to independent appraisers with no incentive to overinflate the value, and it's just over $200,000 underwater. or just over 50%.

okay, that's fine. as i said in an earlier post, equity, gained or lost, is not real until you sell. at least by the accounting rules that i have to play by. so because i'm gainfully employed and have cash reserves, there is no urgent financial pressure to make any moves. i'm not on the brink of foreclosure.

however, i do have a bitchass HOA. one that likes to mail out nasty grams about fees and shit. one that likes to raise fees but not fix shit. hello perpetually borken gate. what is the point of having a gate, if it's stuck open half of the time. but back to their fees. they throw out $100 fees left and right, and say they are due immediatley. with no due process. even the government isn't on that much of a power trip. you at least have about 3 months to pay your tickets and there is a process by which you can appeal said ticket. so should i get a fine from the HOA, i'll be sure to tell them to go f- themselves. oh wait, they tried that and i told them i'd see them in court. fee magically disappeared.

so anyhow, their latest act of bitchassness is to require that we put stickers on our back windows, to identify our cars, so that they know if someone is committing a parking infraction. last i checked, i PAID for my parking spots. i will let you know if someone is in one of them. i don't need you hiring security to verify stall numbers with stickers. security i have to pay for via the ever rising HOA dues. and i don't put stickers on my beemer unless there is huge incentive for ME. providing you another way to bother me is not incentive.

so anyhow, i have an underwater no-recourse mortgage. a bitchass HOA, cash on hand, a husband (in a family way, but not a legal way your debt is my debt way) with perfect credit, and enough knowledge to get my name on the next title but not the mortgage. because with a default i can't for a few years. but i can pay him directly. or something, since he's in favor of me walking away, i'm sure we can work something out.

so what does that mean? it's the perfect storm for walking away.

i've gone from that not being an option to considering it. why? because of the HOA and the stress they cause from their constant threats and nasty grams.

and this my friends, is why i say save your money and always have cash. no matter what your credit score, boatloads of cash will solve all problems.

that is all. time to go back to getting my f-u-money.

The 3 Fs

noreply@blogger.com (techdiva) — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 04:47:00 +0000

it seems like in the women's mags, there is no shortage of advice on things you need to avoid. behaviors you need to change. if you want to keep your man.

check out the latest list of the verboden

ugh, too much work. too many rules. and it's wrong. being all nice and walking on egg shells is not the way to a mans heart. it's much easier. i wish i could take credit for these rules. but i can't they pretty much come from dr. laura. what? really? yes. dr. laura. if you can execute on these three rules, you can pretty much do whatever you want on the forbidden list. because men are not women. they don't want to be manipulated. they want you to:

Feed them.
F#@k them.
and stay Fly.

that's it. cook a steak. ride the pony. and be pleasing to the eye. you do this, and you can get away with most of the infractions on that list. you do #3 and reward him with #2 and he may even ENJOY you doing said infractions.

1 out of 3 won't cut it. 2 out of three will get you pretty far. you can talk some shit. but all three is the trifecta and earns you a perpetual get out of jail free card.

enjoy your pass to be a bitch.

in defense of the "average american"

noreply@blogger.com (techdiva) — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 11:30:00 +0000

disclaimer.

when it comes to healthcare, i am not the average american. i work for a large company with reserves in the Bs, that has huge incentive to provide highly competitive benefits. that incentive is the competition. they don't want me to go there for a matter of a few hundred dollars. so i have a very high degree of certainty that should a public option for healthcare pass, that will save my company money (costs less to contribute to this than to provide insurance through aetna), they won't do it. not because they love me so much. not because they care about me so much. mainly because unless ALL tech companies did this, there would be a mass exodus to the competition.

so my disclaimer it thus. should heathcare legislation pass, unless i mess up the good thing i have going at work, i'll still be able to see my harvard trained doctors and pay them whatever they want with my current insurance. most people have never been on public medical assistance, so they have never heard, "we don't accept medical coupons". but ask the poor. i've been the poor. it happens. so in a mixed system, private and public like we already have, there will be rationing, just not for the rich. those that have, will just probably pay more for priority service. don't believe me? think about "first class seating" on an airline. and actually, it already happens. if you don't believe me, you are either not rich, or going to the wrong providers. imagine a waiting room full of yuppies. no teenage mothers. no mediCal. they exist. i'm not telling you where. they would revoke my membership. just kidding. or am i?

so anyhow, i'm not that worried about if i will be able to see the doctor because i'm willing and able to pay in insurance, cash, gold, silver, diamonds, gucci bags or california IOUs. what u want. i got u... i'm arguing now for those that work for small business. because you my friends, will be fucked. i don't normally really cuss on my blog. but i'm making a point, so i decided not to bleep it.

so, again i'm not saying i want anyone to go without insurance. quite the opposite. i'm just saying, lets get reform right. in a fiscally sound way. no wishful thinking. no fanciful imagining that costs will disappear because doctors will all of a sudden get more efficient. if there were money to be made that way, they would have done it to accomodate more PAYING customers. can i get an amen bain and co? or government offices will get more efficient. what's this? we can't audit the fed? no fancy consultants hired to squash the fraud in all public assistance programs. the government has no interest in becoming more efficient. it wins no votes. those against programs normally hate them no matter how efficient. those that love them, again love them no matter how inefficient. votes are won and lost on ideals, not results.

anyhow, back to story. so we've heard the sob stories of the poor person that was bankrupted because they got cancer. 1:1,000,000. so let's now talk about 1:100. the server at your restaurant.

so, lets say you work in a restaurant. i've worked in one. wages are not the cash cow there. it's tips. many times your paycheck ends up being the size of a day or two's worth of tips, mainly because if you work a dinner shift, you can get clocked out after the rush is over. so it's not always a 40hr week. anyhow. so the point is, we know restaurants have high revenue, but what is not generally known is that they have very slim profit margins (or is it? it might be general knowledge). so imagine if now, labor overhead doubled. which is a reasonable assumption since wages are low. the margins cannot absorb this new expense, so your favorite restaurant is going to pass that cost along to you or go out of business. some will try to pass the cost along and then go out of business. that means now Mr. 1:100 is both without a job, and without insurance.

or take the small business that already provides health insurance, but isn't sitting on billions. the business who's profit margins are slim. the business who is on the verge. judging by all of the vacancy signs in retail buildings, this is more than a few. anyhow. so now they can reduce costs by contributing to the government plan instead of bearing the full cost. this is preferable to bankruptcy. So there goes your ability to keep your current insurance. now mr 1:100 has lost his current insurance.

i'm sure i'll keep mine, or my husband will keep his. so i'm not lobbying for me. this is where i use my blog because i give a shit about you. but not in the way you think. i give a shit about transparency. i just want you to get what you think you're voting for. in this case, call me a skeptic, but the numbers don't lead me to believe that you will. i think you will get less. and then be taxed for it. and told to just wait, while the kinks are worked out of the system. and you not dying in the meanwhile is touted as proof of success.

that is all. vote wisely my friends.

retirement is in sight!

noreply@blogger.com (techdiva) — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 21:42:00 +0000

holy @#$%. i'm proud to announce, that after two years, my google ads have netted .....

drum role plizease.

$18.45.

whoot there it is.

go shory it's my birthday.

oh wait. what? cut the fireworks. i read that wrong. the decimal must be in the wrong place. and it's definitely missing some 0s. i've been doing free promos for your service and all i get for it is $18 bucks. that i can't even collect because you don't pay out until $100. no wonder the googleplex prints money. ~~suckers~~ site owners, actually get a 0% cut in this rev share. i'm sure there's some provision, where i can call, or write in or stand on the street in mountain view cry enough to get my $20. and i'm sure it's the only thing over there that is not online. but i'm lazy. and it's only $20. it's so much easier to just blog about it.

support my laziness. click an ad so i can get past the $100 threshold. it actually would only take about 200 clicks. and i'm sure i've violated something in the terms of use by disclosing that and now owe google a bizillion dollars. well, i'll pay them when it gets to a mega-bizillion. well, how about this. i'll leave your ads up until the debt is settled.

later.

obama's education speech

noreply@blogger.com (techdiva) — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 14:44:00 +0000

so some people are upset about obama addressing the nation's children. and they take issue with the fact that it is in a closed environment, where parents don't have the option to "turn the tv off" if they don't like the content.

i have read the speech, and i agree with it, and in my opinion, he is giving very sound, practical advice. a tried and true path to success. work hard, develop your talents, don't be discouraged by failure, it's just an opportunity to get better.

very solid advice.

but i do understand why some parents would object to any OPINION being forced on their kids. i understand. indoctrination when it's an idea you oppose is kinda scary. if you think about it.

but alas, that already happens in schools. your kids are already subjected to many opinions stated as opinions and opinions masquerading as facts every day. and in many cases, going against the defacto truth is not acceptable. if you don't believe me, have your kid turn in an expertly penned essay stating why the founding fathers were wrong. or whatever, just take any contrary opinion but present the facts in a logical way, and come to a well stated conclusion that is supported by the premises. chances are, the essay will not be graded on the soundness of the argument, it will be graded on the content. have another student turn in some barley literate garbage simply parroting back what they have heard and they might win an award.

so, while i do see their point, that opinions forced upon children by "authority figures" can be worrisome. i fully support this speech (but not heathcare reform) because at least, in our media driven culture encouraging exchanging personal dignity for fast and fleeting fame, it's nice to hear someone promoting methods for lasting success.

and as always, i offer my sage advice (tongue firmly in cheek), your kids are bombarded with messages every day. some you'll agree with, some you won't. some you can control, some you can't. it's up to you to talk to you kids. and help them to think. and understand. and to come to their own conclusions about life, because they will anyhow. so at best, you can guide them in this process and make it happen earlier, so that when they are young, and impressionable, they are less susceptible to bullshit. because we all know, opinions are like a@@holes. everyone has one. and it was one of my teachers that gave me that gem.

but back to the point. in regards to the speech, go obama!

but that doesn't meant i support heathcare reform. nice ideals, and a really pretty picture but from my POV, as a payer, and not a recipient of said benefits, fiscally unsound.

other people's business - again

noreply@blogger.com (techdiva) — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 19:30:00 +0000

so once again, i'm going to comment on someone else's business.

this time, it's the Duggers. the family with 19 kids.

i say, who cares. they aren't asking you for your money, time or help, so who cares what they do.

this is in response to a blog post i read that criticized them for not adopting other people's kids instead of having their own.

why should they do that? if it's in your heart to adopt great, but since when was someone else's child your responsiblity? oh wait, in the US it actually is via social services. so whether it's right or wrong that we are taxed to pay for other people's kids isn't the point of this post. kids are actually the ONE place where you can get my heart to bleed a little bit. but the point is, this family is totally self sufficient and the kids all seem very happy and grounded. the girls seem to have total respect for themselves and their bodies. holy f- give that woman a medal of honor. you raised what 12 girls that aren't dreaming of getting a man's attention on the ~~stripper~~ exercise pole. your whole family seems to be mature and responsible. bravo. AND you walk your faith w/out thumping the bible at those that don't. again, bravo. give them an emmy.

so i say, if you must say unadopted kids are a problem, them point the finger at the parents that are looking to pass the outcome of their choices off on someone else. adoption is great, don't get me wrong, but if there is a problem, it's not the parents who are making stable choices and personal sacrifices that enable them to raise their own children.

lets stop coddling the irresponsible at the expense of the responsible.

a ciascuno il suo to each their own

auto makers fail.

noreply@blogger.com (techdiva) — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 04:51:00 +0000

so while the automakers didn't get the same levels of subsidies that the banks got, they still were deemed to valuable and important to fail. or rather, there were too many voters that would have lost their jobs, so congress spent our money paying them to in turn get paid by staying in office.

too cynical?

anyhoo...here's a list of 10 american car companies that have failed. and proof that after failure, the american auto business does go on.

as if it wouldn't. we're suburban sprawl. maybe we don't need 2 cars per household, but most people out side of san francisco and NY couldn't even get to work without a car. but anyhow the point is, there is huge demand for cars, so its ridiculous to even propose that no new company would form to fill this demand. but with a business structure that was profitable. or at least not paid for by unwilling taxpayers. but if i do have to pay, can i get a CEO to beg me PERSONALLY for my money. i would enjoy that very much.

f.u. bailout beggers. were i a judge i would condemn you to a life of driving your own cars while you go by each tax payers house thanking them for their forced generosity.

NSFW - ego matters

noreply@blogger.com (techdiva) — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 23:18:00 +0000

So while perusing through blogs that i shouldn't be reading, i ran across this...

The Single Life - Does size matter?

the article is not worth reading because those chicks are lying.

as my public service for the day, i'm going to set the record straight.

yes.

it.

does.

however money matters too. as do other things, but i can't think of another substitute that i would accept until death, or my frustration, do us part.

good thing that is not a problem i have.

that is all.

you know it's a recession when....

noreply@blogger.com (techdiva) — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 19:51:00 +0000

bottle service goes on sale.

i just got an email for a club tonite where VIP entrance for 4 plus a bottle of goose is on sale for $175.

if $44 is the cost of VIP it can't be very good times. that's what you'd normally pay for cover and drinks.

that is all. be exclusive my friends.

see, i can use the kings english when necessary.

noreply@blogger.com (techdiva) — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 16:42:00 +0000

Dear Senator Boxer,

Recently the vehicle registration fees were increased by .5 percent. As you know, this almost doubled the fees. While I understand that the state has serious budget problems, increasing fees on tax paying citizens is not a sustainable solution.

While I do have compassion for my fellow citizens that do not work, I also have compassion for my fellow citizens that do work and are forced to provide for others at the expense of providing necessities for their own families. There is a point where the taxes and fees get too high to be sustainable and we have definitely reached that point.

Please consider the impact these higher fees are having on working Californians like myself who for the first time will register and vote Republican, just to prevent financial death by taxation.

Respectfully,
Aliseya Wright
Oakland, CA

stock market ponzi aka garunteed returns.

noreply@blogger.com (techdiva) — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 20:11:00 +0000

you're going to hate this thought. and i'm sorry. but it deserves consideration.

there is a fundamental problem with 401k's and with expecting 8% returns annually to fund your retirement. the problem with this is that it expects stocks, and therefore companies to always be in a growth stage with increasing revenues. okay. what's so bad about that? companies grow. yes, they do, but markets have a natural cap. and the 8% growth every year expectation doesn't respect that. so what's a CEO, who has a fiduciary duty to the shareholders to do when there is no natural room for the company's business to grow. buy out the competition. voila, there is some growth. enter new markets it may or may not have any business being in and hope that new division spurs some growth, or reduce headcount. or do some accounting trickery. but for now, lets leave illegal activities out of this discussion.

so let me chat for a minute about that last (legal) one. established companies do have some fat to cut. i'm not denying that. it's mainly because in times of product growth, you are doing a lot of work. in times of product maintenanance, the work is less. not for all industries, but for some. But my point is, companies have some fat. who should get to live off the fat? those employees that built the company, or passive investors that want annual returns. To get those returns sometimes headcount must be slashed. not always. but CEO's of publicly held companies do not have the option to tell wall street to shush it while they take care of those that built the company. is this right or wrong? well, on this one i'm sitting the fence. the company is publicly held and therefore traded private funding for public funding. i'm just saying the endless drive for increasing profits is a result of people relying on them for passive income. what's that you say? no it's not. CEO's are greedy.

no more so than anyone else. however, unlike the average person, they are **heavily** incentivized to increase profits. if someone said, i'll give you 50-million-dollars

pause while you visualize your new lifestyle

50-million-dollars but you have to lay off these 1000 people you don't know would you do it.

f- right you'd do it. the hippiest of you hippies would do it. because you'd assume welfare or unemployment would kick in, and everyone will end up aiight. with you, and your 50-million ending up super aiight.

anyhow, back to the point, were the measure of success different. say increase customer satisfaction, or save the planet, or insert cause here, and were bonuses and pay tied to THAT measure, then you'd say wow, CEOs are the most altruistic people on earth. but that's not how the game is rigged. passive investors want their money to work for them. so CEOs do what they have to do to make that happen. because it is their job. don't like it, don't invest in said company. hipocracy check: do you sit there all smug denouncing company xyz for their greed, while company xyz is in your investment portfolio, hiding in that mutual or index fund? check it out. your actual support for corporate greed might surprise you. that goes for you too pensioners.

so anyhow, as we lament the fact that our cable bills have tripled in the last few years, lets also think about the system that pressures CEOs to
1) expand into all possible markets as far as possible, then
2) creatively or blatantly charge more for existing services, and then finally
3) eliminate as much waste (read: headcount) as possible.

lets think about our roles in this system.

are 401ks bad. gosh no. savings is g-double-o-d good. i will never blog about the virtues of spending your chances for ever retiring away. but the expectation that you can, by doing no work, get 8% returns every year is not realistic. but what about huge CEO bonuses and run-away pay for those at the top. that is a tougher issue and one that requires it's own discussion but i will briefly say as long as a company does not have a government supported monopoly (hello post office), and does not take public funds (hello banks and auto industries), well let them do with their profits as they wish.

so anyhow, if i think pensions are unsustainable and that 401ks will not deliver as promised, what do i recommend?

well, if you can, pay off some piece of property before you retire or find some other way to keep your cost of living in line with your estimated income in retirement do that. save your money. don't go fully in stocks, or even gov bonds. while cash may not be sexy, it's never a bad thing to have around. and estimate conservatively. the only thing guaranteed with 401ks is the fees you (or your employer) pay the investment firm. and in your youth, work. while you can.

dear neighbors and friends,

noreply@blogger.com (techdiva) — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 15:24:00 +0000

since we're going to be subsidizing healthcare, i want in.

can i get $100 on the cost of my pregnancy from each of you? you can send all donations to me via paypal, or you can come by my house, with a stack of ones and make it rain. i would enjoy that very much.

and please no new cars this year. i'm going to be having another baby, and he'll need some shots and such, so i need you to save up for cost of this. if you start now, it'll hurt less.

also thank a bunch for bearing this responsibility. i told my fiance no second baby because i was getting stressed about how i was going to pay for it all! now we can have all 6!

xoxo.

all up in thier business

noreply@blogger.com (techdiva) — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 18:18:00 +0000

i have no business of my own i want to discuss today, so i'm going to get all up in someone else's. Mainly because I had quite a few interesting things to choose from today.

who's really a man?
megan wants a millionaire that won't kill her
and maury didn't have enough pull to get john edwards on the show.

so my choice for the day, in honor of the fact that i'd rather be at home watching maury right now, is john edwards, his love child, and his other family.

this doesn't need much discussion, so I will just state the obvious.

men, if you must cheat, wrap it up. by not doing so, and ruining the good situation you had going with a stray child, (poor child...) this is how you, as a gender, get yourself the reputation for being retarded when it comes to pu$$y. a woman can forgive many things as long as she doesn't get slapped in the face with it every day. a love child is the worst way to remind her that not only did you seek marital pleasure elsewhere. you built a damn family elsewhere. now, not only did that chick have her hands in your pants, she will for the next few decades, have her hands deep in your pockets. that is unnacceptable. wives, for this transgression, i say leave him, take all of his money and f- it off on getting your groove back. well, you shouldn't have lost your groove in the first place, but i'll stop at the risk of sounding like this was her fault. it was not.

he gave that girl a baby! i wish a m- f- would...