I'm wearing a 40 year-old shirt

This shirt was my grandfather's. He was a jewelry who worked in New York City and Provincetown, Massachusetts. The shirt is thinner and lighter than any shirts I see today, probably because it predates ubiquitous air conditioning.

Microsoft docs.com PLUS Facebook is utterly bizarre

Microsoft docs.com PLUS Facebook is an utterly bizarre combination. Am I the only one who thinks this?

Microsoft has a new service at www.docs.com that goes up against Google Docs. As far as I can tell so far, it's wonderful. It's an online version of Office that allows you to create, edit and save documents online and collaboratively edit them. That's just like Google Docs. But Microsoft has created a seamless integration with the desktop version of Office. If you've ever tried to go back and forth between Google Docs and Microsoft Office, you know that it's not a seamless process. Microsoft Office online to the desktop versions and back again is seamless, as far as I can tell so far.

So why oh why is it a requirement that in order to use the online version of Office, you have to have a Facebook account and connect your online Office to your Facebook account? Facebook is a disaster in terms of privacy and it is all about one's social life. From a branding point of view, this is what it says to me:

Microsoft Office online is for kids wanting to do their homework and for one's personal life.
Google Docs is for business.

CRazy! Ray Ozzie, don't you have any control over your marketing and branding folks? Can someone explain the strategy here to me?

Wonderful, wonderful videos with Iain Boal on the history of cycling

The Green Machine - Lecture by Bicycle Historian Iain Boal Part 1 of 5 from Copenhagenize on Vimeo.

Joshua Littman, a 12-year-old boy with Asperger’s syndrome, questioning his mom

Q&A from StoryCorps on Vimeo.

Worth repeating: Bill Gates and Climate Change

In light of the ongoing battle with climate change crazies (which I respectfully distinguish from those who acknowledge the science of climate change but believe there may be other priorities) I must post this video from February by Bill Gates. Latest crazies? The Donald and the Virginia A.G. (who it seems to me should move to Iran, where he'd be probably be more comfortable).

Volvo V70 leaving the U.S.; listing of remaining wagons available

UPDATED. Volvo has just announced that their V70 wagon will be leaving the U.S. This wagon traces its heritage all the way back to the classic 240. Why Americans don't love wagons more is beyond me. What's left? There are still some wonderful wagons out there, including the Cadillac CTS Sportswagon, one of the most striking offerings ever. Here's a revision of my comprehensive list.

TRUE Wagons (squared off variants of sedans and a few others with no sedan equivalent)

Acura TSX (late 2010)

Audi A3, A4, A6

BMW 3 Series, 5 Series

Cadillac CTS, CTS-V

Chevrolet HHR (no sedan equiv)

Chrysler PT Cruiser (no sedan equiv)
Hyundai Elantra Touring
Lincoln MKT (no sedan equiv)
Mercedes Benz E350 (2011)

Mini Cooper Clubman, Countryman (2011)

Saab 9-3, 9-5

Scion xB (no sedan equiv)

Subaru Outback

Toyota Venza (essentially a Camry wagon)

Volvo V50, V60 (2011?), V70, XC70

VW Jetta, Passat

Small wagons that due to their height are slightly more van-like

Kia Rondo

Mazda 5

Almost wagons but more like small hatchbacks (angled backs)

Dodge Caliber

Toyota Matrix (used to be more of a wagon in an older iteration)

Larger hatchbacks

Aston Martin Rapide

Bugatti 16C Galibier

BMW 3 Series GT (probably late 2010), 5 Series GT

Honda Accord Crosstour

Honda Insight

Porsche Panamera

Toyota Prius

Looks like a large hatchback but isn't

Lexus GS

BIG Country Squire-type wagons

Audi Q7 (this thing is massive--it just goes on and on and on)

Ford Flex (don't tell me it's a crossover)

Mercedes R Class (same kinda BIG wagon as the Ford Flex)

Examples of vehicles that blur the line between wagon and SUV.

Ford Edge
Honda CRV
Nissan Juke and Rogue

Mitsubishi Outlander

Subaru Forester

Toyota RAV4

Japanese cubes

Honda Element

Kia Soul

Nissan Cube

analogs to Kindles and iPads in the meat world

I bought version 2 of the Kindle when it first came out in early 2009. I loved it. At the time I called it my favorite electronic device. It increased the joy of reading for me immensely. I could read anytime. I could have all my books at my fingertips. I never lost my place. The device was aesthetically pleasing in its anonymous white and chrome and it so light that I could easily hold it for long periods in one hand (btw, something not true of the larger Kindle DX). But most important, I found it easier to lose myself in the narrative than with a paper book. Because the physical form of the book was gone and standardized, I could entirely focus on the content. I would be happy to never buy another book again. But I began to realize that some books didn't work on the Kindle. Certainly works that are pure narrative is perfect. These books are written without thought to their containers, to their form. These are "Formless Content" books, as articulated by Craig Mod in his must-read piece on the future of books, Books in the Age of the iPad. But what Craig Mod calls "Definite Content" books, books that are designed so their layout and design elements--pictures, charts etc.--are an integral part of the book, don't work with devices like the Kindle. They need either the current paper form of the book or can be adapted to the new form that is the opportunity represented by the iPad.

I'm hopeful that the iPad or devices like it can allow me to keep both my formless and definite content out in the cloud. But what about the rest of life? Once we've freed ourselves of the need to maintain physical ownership of books, what else can we free ourselves from? What else do we not need to physically possess? Here are a few examples:

1. Cars. Certainly within an urban environment, you don't need to own a car. But a car is still an object that we covet, much like some of us covet physical books. The "Kindle of cars" seems to be Zipcar, the company that provides when you want it cars to its members. But cars are such an integral part of the identify of so many people, just like rare, beautiful books are for some and clothes are for others that Zipcar-like services can only go so far.

2. Food. Community Supported Agriculture farms (CSA's), like Zipcar, allows you to experience farming without the physical ownership of land. The farmers do most of the work but your membership provides them a guaranteed income and you get to engage in both the community of farming and the edible results.

3. Office space. Like Zipcar, co-working spaces allow you to get away from owning your office and instead give you flexible, as you need it work and meeting space. Certainly this works for knowledge workers. But even for businesses that require physical equipment, there are some shared services, such as commercial kitchens that rent space and equipment to small-scale food producers.

4. Vacation properties. Funded by some of the same investors as Zipcar, Exclusive Resorts is a high end example of shared vacation ownership in which people own a share of the company that makes available hundreds of properties around the world for vacations.

5. Housing. Co-housing communities have spread across the country. Sort of a mashup of a commune and a condo, it allows members to own their own houses but participate in the larger community and its resources (such as community meeting spaces and kitchens) as much or as little as they want.

What other analogs to Kindles and iPads are out there in the physical world? And what still needs to be owned and personally, physically retained? Clothing for the most part. One's own personal electronic devices, to some extent. Spouses? Maybe not but I'm not going there!

Points For Toothbrushing: The Gaming Speech Everyone Is Talking About

DICE 2010: "Design Outside the Box" Presentation Videos - G4tv.com - Watch more Videos at Vodpod.

via Kotaku

dramatic and disturbing video of fake bomb detecting devices

via Gizmodo LINK

Update: Canada to US air travel security restrictions

Canada has loosened it's carry-on restrictions for travel to the U.S. Information here (via OneBagOneWorld.)

Looks like I can carry both my Tom Bihn Ristretto and Aeronaut . . . just barely.

Report: Canada #YVR to US air travel security w/ @tombihn laptop bag

Before my trip to Canada I had a very hard time finding good information about the new travel restrictions for travel by air from Canada to the United States. The general statement of "no carryons" isn't quite right. A comprehensive of permitted items is now listed at the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority (PDF). The confusing distinction is that they permit laptop bags but not briefcases. Here's what I observed from my experience traveling today through Vancouver airport security:

• wheeled luggage of any size, even if it's laptop bag, is definitely not allowed
• carryons that can be shown to be designed to carry laptops are allowed
• My Tom Bihn Ristretto (a small over-the-shoulder satchel) was allowed through. I had packed in it a small Lenovo, an accessories zipper pouch, Bose headphones, a camera and a Kindle.
• I saw a woman with a Zero Halliburton style attache case. She appeared to get through. She was not carrying a purse in addition.
• Standard, generic, "Dell-style" laptop briefcases for 14-17" style larger laptops were getting through but they appeared to be lightly packed.
• Many people were carrying laptops in slipcases or "naked".
• Women were being turned away with large purses (my guess is anything that's really stuffed and is larger than ~14 inches long).

At 5:30 am on a Monday the lines were short but slow. By 5:45 they had lengthened considerably. The procedure at YVR now is that you drop your checked luggage some distance before you go through security--it used to be adjacent--so if you have to return to put something in checked baggage it will be a bit of a walk. The security personnel are taking as much time as they need. It appeared that in addition to the X-ray screening, all luggage was also being hand searched.

fuel efficient station wagons

The most fuel efficient wagons are a little easier to parse from the EPA website than 5+ passenger/4wd vehicles. The Jetta and A3 tops the list in its diesel form of course. Everything else falls far short in terms of fuel economy. If you haven't taken a look at a Jetta lately, it's grown a bit and might fit you now. Combined, city, highway below:

34/30/42 VW Jetta and Audi A3 (they use the same engine)

28/26/32 Toyota Matrix (and its better looking twin, the Pontiac Vibe, if you can find one before they're gone as Pontiac is vaporized)

After that you've got the Suzuki SX4, Kia Soul, Dodge Caliber, and, surprisingly, the VW Passat, which is so much bigger than the others. Now if only they'd relaunch the diesel version of that VW . . .

25/22/31 VW Passat (note that it wants premium unleaded)

fuel efficient 4wd and fuel efficient 6 or 7 passenger vehicles

Several people have asked me variations on these questions over the last few weeks: (1) what are the most fuel efficient 4 wheel drive vehicles? (2) what are the most fuel efficient 6 or 7 passenger vehicles? and (3) what is the overlap of these two sets?

As a corollary to my wagon listing (LINK) here are the answers, best as I can figure them out (with help from the EPA fuel economy website).

First, the most fuel efficient 4 wheel drive vehicles, in descending order with the combined fuel economy number first, then city, the highway:

29/30/28 Lexus RX450h Hybrid
29/30/27 Ford Escape, Mercury Mariner, Mazda Tribute Hybrids (triplet vehicles with different badges)
26/27/25 Toyota Highlander Hybrid
25/23/29 Suzuki SX4 (variable auto)
26/23/31 Subaru Legacy Sedan (variable auto)
25/23/28 Jeep Compass and Patriot (manual)
25/22/30 Audi A4 and A5 (manual)

25/22/30 Suzuki SX4 (manual)

24/22/29 Subaru Outback Wagon (variable auto)
24/21/29 Audi TT
24/21/28 Audi A3 (gas, auto)
24/21/27 Toyota Rav4 4cyl
23/20/28 Toyota Venza 4cyl
(I've skipped a whole bunch that won't count for the overlapping set)

22/19/26 BMW X5 Diesel

20/18/24 Mercedes-Benz R350 Bluetec Diesel

20/17/25 Audi Q7 Diesel

Second, the most fuel efficient vehicles that can seat more than 5, in descending order with the combined fuel economy number first, then city, the highway:

26/27/25 Toyota Highlander Hybrid

24/22/28 Mazda5 (manual)
24/21/27 Toyota Rav4 4cyl
23/21/27 Mazda5 (auto)
22/20/27 Kia Rondo 4cyl
22/19/26 Toyota Sienna 4cyl (estimate)
22/19/26 BMW X5 Diesel
21/18/26 Kia Rondo 6cyl
20/18/24 Mercedes-Benz R350 Bluetec Diesel
20/17/25 Audi Q7 Diesel
20/17/25 Honda Odyssey (variable cylinder management version)

Third, the overlapping set:

Image via Wikipedia

26/27/25 Toyota Highlander Hybrid
24/21/27 Toyota Rav4 4cyl
22/19/26 BMW X5 Diesel
20/18/24 Mercedes-Benz R350 Bluetec Diesel
20/17/25 Audi Q7 Diesel

thoughts on left vs right

I've found myself recently unable to shy away from mixing my personal, professional and political lives.

Global warming deniers infuriate me (and not just because my brother is a prominent climate change scientist). Sarah Palin strikes me as one step removed from fascism (and yes, I know that's her perspective on Obama). In railing against these things I seem to automatically get tarred with an anti-capitalist, big government brush. Why do those things have to go together? Why, for example, is acceptance of the evidence for anthropocentric global warming, and therefore the belief that policies should be enacted, necessarily connected to a belief in big government?

A long time ago--I think at Bush 43's second election--I told my one employee at the time that I'd just voted. He told me that he'd also just voted . . . and that his votes had probably cancelled mine out. I was shocked. Here in my own midst was someone who'd voted entirely for the other side and I hadn't realized it because we seemed to have so much in common. Since then he and I have become good friends and we've learned that our political views are much more alike than they are different. But when he goes to ballot box, he throwns down on the side of candidates who appear to espouse economic freedom and small government, regardless of their other positions. When I go to the ballot box, my litmus test has to do with individual liberties like gay rights and issues like healthcare reform, regardless of whether the candidate has the sort of business perspectives I favor. Friends like him see the threat more from government regulation of economic affairs than a tendency to favor a blend of church and state. I on the other hand bite my tongue around big government approaches to healthcare and climate change because I'm terrified of the merger of religion and politics and of "no regulation" as a cover for corporatism.

What amazes me is how this group of people--our group--can't find common ground in the political establishment. For example, every venture capitalist I know voted for Obama. That doesn't mean that every VC out there voted for Obama but I'd think my largely New England sample would be a little less uniform. In fact, you'd think that a group that exemplifies rabid capitalism would en masse steer clear of the Democratic Party. But like me they simply couldn't stomach voting for a ticket that included a woman with a dim view of science and a highly favorable view of the value of the laying on of hands. (I'm convinced that without Palin, many people I know would have considered a McCain ticket. Biggest mistake of his life.)

A top VC, Fred Wilson, recently wrote a post called "Stuck in the Middle" articulating his support of Obama. The first comment on the post is a comprehensive critique. The comment states derisively that the current administration has drawn only 10% of its inner circle from people who have any private sector experience. Another commenter, sympathetic to the critique, declares that the pendulum is swinging back to an era where individual freedoms are favored (I think he's referring favorably to tea baggers and all that). There's that divide again: either you're from the public sector OR you believe in individual liberty; either you believe the evidence points to such a high probability of anthropocentric climate change that public policy is warranted OR you're against big government; either you believe in healthcare as a fundamental right that must be made available to all OR you're an advocate of small businesses and entrepreneurship. It seems that in the popular press and in the mainstream political establishment you can't be both sides at the same time: you can't be a believer in anthropocentric climate change AND a believer in small government; a believer in universal healthcare AND an advocate of small business. And THAT is just wrong and dangerous for our future.

Long ago I was taught that the ends of the political spectrum meet at the same point. I believe that the most radical position is in the middle and that the best of America exemplifies that position. Let's hope we can stay centered and don't fly apart.

Reasons to buy a Kindle or a Nook

People have been asking me whether I like my Kindle and whether they should buy one. Two reasons to buy plus some downsides.

First, it's single purpose. For those generally in touch with gadgets, the buzz is that the Apple "iTablet" is going to launch and therefore, shouldn't you wait for that device because surely, like the iPhone, it will have a free Kindle application? Maybe. It will be hard to justify the cost of both a single purpose Kindle and the iTablet. It seems likely that the iTablet will launch, sooner or later, or at least that Apple will be launching a higher resolution version of the iPhone on which book reading will be even better than the current iPhone. But the key to the Kindle is that it does one thing that the iTablet will never do: not everything. The beauty of the Kindle is that it's single purpose. When you're using it you don't have the seduction of the WWW. Your world is restricted to the multi-tasking afforded by having a multitude of books at your fingertips. If you want to read books on a multi-purpose device, you can read them quite well on your laptop. The PC version works very well and a Mac version is coming soon. When I don't have my Kindle and I can't resist the allure of a place like Brakebills, my laptop is ready to serve.

Second, it's the future today. Why not stick with paper books? I love paper books. I'd love a library room in my house with floor to ceiling bookshelves, chairs for reading, silence and the right light. But those books would be largely decoration. And my house is already overflowing with paper books and I don't even have a dedicated library. I like the idea of having fewer physical possessions, not more, and being able to carry the world of knowledge in a little device that can slip unnoticed into my bag. In the future--the not too distant future--we'll have devices with screens indistinguishable from paper that are just a few millimeters thick, perhaps can be rolled up, and can carry tens or hundreds of thousands of books. I look forward to that day! Functionally, the Kindle comes close enough to be able to taste that future now.

Downsides? You can't share books on the Kindle (you can on Barnes & Noble's Nook). The data is stored at Amazon. Sure, if they vaporized you'd still have the books on your Kindle. But still, it feels a bit like owning them on long-term loan from Amazon instead of really owning them. And the freaky echoes are still resonating of Amazon pulling back Orwell's 1984 from people's Kindles when they realized they didn't have the copyright for that edition worked out.