KPAO by Dave Cortright

Recruiters calling with blocked caller ID? Bad idea

I get calls regularly by recruiters, and it amazes me the number of them who have their caller ID blocked. A blocked number already looks pretty sketchy, so I rarely answer it. But when I do and I find out it's a recruiter, it really throws me off. I would think recruiters would want to advertise themselves as much as possible. Wouldn't recruiters want their phone number to appear in my call history to make it easy for me to call them back?

Overall I've had pretty good experiences with recruiters who work directly for a company. But 3rd party contract recruiters have been the polar opposite. Perhaps I'm overly sensitive to these things, but I have to wonder how any of them stay in business given their work practices. Or said another way, I wonder how much more successful they could be if they would only approach their business with a more customer-centric view.

I'm done with Facebook

I just deactivated my Facebook account. I've had it with their poor privacy decisions playing fast and loose with my personal information in an attempt to generate profits. This article was the last straw for me.

Imagine visiting a website and finding that it already knows who you are, where you live, how old you are and who your Facebook friends are, without your ever having given it permission to access that information. If you're logged in to Facebook and visit some as yet unnamed "pre-approved" sites around the web, those sites may soon have default access to data about your Facebook account and friends, the company announced today...

That sounds downright creepy. It's nice to have one-click access to your Facebook info if you decide to share it with other sites - that's what Facebook Connect does - but the prospect of having that information automatically shared when you show up on another website seems like an idea that won't be well received by users. There's a big difference between opt-in and opt-out "data portability."

I couldn't agree more.

What's the hidden goal in driving directions?

(I think Phil will like this one...)

Back when I was working at Venrock, I had the opportunity to work on a start-up focused on in-car computing. Dash had just come out, in-car GPS units hit the $100 price point and becoming widely adopted, and the partners were excited about the opportunities here and were willing to back it up with some serious funding.

One of the great things of being a part of the incubation group was that I could get involved very early on and help set the (customer-focused) vision for the company. In this particular case, I asked the broad question, "what is the underlying goal people are trying to accomplish when they get in their cars, and how do we help them achieve that goal?"

One scenario I looked at was driving directions. Several people on the team thought this problem was "already solved" and were focused on "differentiating features" like bringing social networking and real-time web into the car. But a close look at driving directions showed that the problem was far from solved.

For one, people today often use a computer to look at a map or get directions, then they have to repeat that task on their device once they get to the car. There clearly should be an easy way to sync the history of maps on the computer with the in-car device.

Another insight: shopping is a common reason to get in the car. Stores like Best Buy and BevMo already allow you to shop online and pick it up at the store. Integrating with store inventories to tell people where items are available and even allowing people to "buy it now" on the way not only helps people optimize their trip, but makes for a great business model.

But the insight I had that I love the most is with driving directions. Every single directions app out there ignores the hidden goal, which is that you first need to park the car before you go to your eventual destination. Yes, in many instances the parking and destination are the same. But in high-density areas (like San Francisco) this isn't so. What people want is a device that will get them near their destination, and then navigate them to a place where they can cheaply and safely park their car, ideally even taking care of any parking fees for you automatically. Once parked, it would then show you directions from your car to your destination also send them to your phone to help you as you walk the final leg of the journey.

Unfortunately, the company decided to go a different direction with their vision. But maybe there is another mobile computing company who will find this information useful. If so, I'd love to hear from you.

There's a difference between lemon-lime and melon-lime

I found out the hard way.

Customer experience vs advertising

I recently realized that the companies I interact with that have the best customer experience generally spend little to no money on advertising. OK, so I can only think of three right now: Amazon, Google, and Trader Joe's. And a fourth—In-n-Out burger—that I don't go to anymore now that I'm vegan. But I think it's still an interesting observation (and I'm sure I'm not the first to notice this). Yes you can gain customers via advertising. But it takes a company that is really focused on satisfying customers to get away with no advertising at all.

Health Care Reform passed

Health Care Reform passed the US House or Representatives last night. But there are 212 Americans who do not deserve its benefits: All of the Republicans, and these 34 Democrats who voted against it:

1. Rep. John Adler (N.J.)
2. Rep. Jason Altmire (Pa.)
3. Rep. Michael Arcuri (N.Y.)
4. Rep. John Barrow (Ga.)
5. Rep. Marion Berry (Ark.)
6. Rep. Dan Boren (Ind.)
7. Rep. Rick Boucher (Va.)
8. Rep. Bobby Bright (Ala.)
9. Rep. Ben Chandler (Ky.)
10. Rep. Travis Childers (Miss.)
11. Rep. Artur Davis (Ala.)
12. Rep. Lincoln Davis (Tenn.)
13. Rep. Chet Edwards (Texas)
14. Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (S.D.)
15. Rep. Tim Holden (Pa.)
16. Rep. Larry Kissell (N.C.)
17. Rep. Frank Kratovil (Md.)
18. Rep. Dan Lipinski (Ill.)
19. Rep. Stephen Lynch (Mass.)
20. Rep. Jim Marshall (Ga.)
21. Rep. Jim Matheson (Utah)
22. Rep. Mike McIntyre (N.C.)
23. Rep. Mike McMahon (N.Y.)
24. Rep. Charlie Melancon (La.)
25. Rep. Walt Minnick (Idaho)
26. Rep. Glenn Nye (Va.)
27. Rep. Collin Peterson (Minn.)
28. Rep. Mike Ross (Ark.)
29. Rep. Heath Shuler (N.C.)
30. Rep. Ike Skelton (Mo.)
31. Rep. Zack Space (Ohio)
32. Rep. John Tanner (Tenn.)
33. Rep. Gene Taylor (Miss.)
34. Rep. Harry Teague (N.M.)

There is so much irrationality and emotion around this issue, that it makes the few analytical and reasoned analyses appear even more impressive in contrast. Here are two of my favorites:

The Republican's Waterloo by David Frum

A huge part of the blame for today’s disaster attaches to conservatives and Republicans ourselves.

At the beginning of this process we made a strategic decision: unlike, say, Democrats in 2001 when President Bush proposed his first tax cut, we would make no deal with the administration. No negotiations, no compromise, nothing. We were going for all the marbles. This would be Obama’s Waterloo - just as health care was Clinton’s in 1994.

Only, the hardliners overlooked a few key facts: Obama was elected with 53% of the vote, not Clinton’s 42%. The liberal block within the Democratic congressional caucus is bigger and stronger than it was in 1993-94. And of course the Democrats also remember their history, and also remember the consequences of their 1994 failure.

This time, when we went for all the marbles, we ended with none.

Fear Strikes Out by Paul Krugman
For the most part, opponents of reform didn’t even pretend to engage with the reality either of the existing health care system or of the moderate, centrist plan — very close in outline to the reform Mitt Romney introduced in Massachusetts — that Democrats were proposing. Instead, the emotional core of opposition to reform was blatant fear-mongering, unconstrained either by the facts or by any sense of decency…

Without question, the campaign of fear was effective: health reform went from being highly popular to wide disapproval… But the question was, would it actually be enough to block reform?

And the answer is no. The Democrats have done it… In the end, a vicious, unprincipled fear offensive failed to block reform. This time, fear struck out.

Conditional health care legislation

Having done absolutely no research on this subject, I wonder if the US Congress can pass conditional legislation. Specifically, I would like to see a bill that would cancel any politician's health care coverage who chooses not to vote for the health care reform bill. If these representatives don't think health care is a problem, then it shouldn't be a big deal for them to go get a policy for themselves and their families on the open market, right?

Of course I still like my original idea of outright canceling all government health care benefits. I can think of nothing better for getting the right thing to happen then to force these folks to experience the current health care system for themselves.

Summer Biathlon - talk about ratings!

While watching the winter Olympics, the inherent randomness of the biathlon came up. cross country skiing and shooting? That's like the Chewbacca defense. It does not make sense.

So I got to thinking, what would be an equivalently random biathlon for the summer Olympics? Swimming and grenade throwing, of course! Swimming is vastly superior to running or biking since there is water involved: more chances for a live grenade to slip out of the competitors hands and end up in the pool. And of course grenades because that's just awesome, am I right?!

So you do like 30 laps in the pool—any stroke you want—then you pull a grenade off of your ammo belt, pull the pin, and chuck it at a target 30 meters away.

I'm hoping it's at least a demonstration sport in 2012.

Why the USA is unhealthy and obese

I love PCRM. This is a fantastic infographic that summarizes the root problem with the USA's farm subsidy program which encourages the public to eat unhealthy foods.



Note that both pyramids are misleading in that the ratios between the sections are proportionate to the height of the section, rather than the surface area or volume. Given that, these should be bars rather than pyramids.

More meta humor

Coming to theaters whenever there's nothing else good playing, it's Movie Title!

Inspiring final lines of a speech that douchebags will quote in their Facebook profiles!

And now, some filler bullshit story to pad the nightly news.