Mr Richards on technology, information, and people

Funes Cannot Think, or Do I Need 24 Days of Songs in my iTunes?

2010-08-17T07:55:00.001-04:00

I am in the middle of reading Borges's Collected Fictions (translated by Andrew Hurley) and have already concluded the man was a genius. Most recently, as of a few minutes ago I completed reading Funes, His Memory.

First off, I appreciate the translation note that said in the original Spanish the title was "Funes el memorioso." Yes, there is no exact translation into English for "el memorioso," which basically means "the guy with lots of memory," but to leave it as Funes, His Memory is to almost say the story was about Funes's memory. But it is about Funes and his inability to think.

Funes is "virtually incapable of general, platonic ideas" but has the most amazing memory in the world. He learns the entire Latin language in a week - from a book written in Latin and a dictionary. He proposes a new numbering system based on words - having memorized that 7014 is equal to "railroad." The narrator, in talking to Funes, disagrees and says this is not a system.

Funes and Locke agree that a language with each thing having its own name is disagreeable, but for differing reasons. Whereas Locke thinks the detail too much, Funes thinks it too little. And that's the problem with the ability to recall each and every experience - to never forget - by that same token he can never think.

Borges writes, through his narrator, that: "To think is to ignore (or forget) differences, to generalize, to abstract."

Its a powerful statement and one that should be compared to the cheapening cost of new hard drives and cloud computing storage space. Do you really need 24 days of songs in your iTunes? Do you require photos, every one, to be kept throughout for the next 30 years?

I think all this digital storage is a great thing but at a certain point you have to compromise. Every one experience cataloged, stored, and re-experienced is another new experience that may never have time to happen.

Potato Chips and Gov 2.0

2010-05-27T13:33:00.006-04:00

Meanwhile at the current O'Reilly Gov 2.0 Expo in Washington, D.C. ...

Tim Berners-Lee, excuse me, Sir Tim, describes a bag of potato chips and how it represents the future of linked open data on the Web. No, seriously. (I like how this article makes sure to tell you he's talking about UTZ Kettle Classics, rather than make us think of Lays or, Lord help us, SunChips.)

Let's look at this from a Gov 2.0 standpoint - I assume that is his audience given the Expo he's at.

- I'm all for decentralizing information, but at some point, you need a coherent framework or else your communication capabilities goes to zero.

For example, how do you standardize the data sets you want to click through to? Different agencies means different systems and different formats.

- Will there be a common technical platform everyone will work from?
- Will data be interfaced over in batch or real-time? Who is in charge of maintaining the hardware? The software?

These questions need to be asked and addressed in concert with the "visions of the future." Or else nothing happens - or perhaps worse - everything happens but wrong.
-

Porn, Oil Spill and Nepotism

2010-05-27T10:42:00.008-04:00

Let's get past the outrageous title of this Atlantic article "Did Porn Cause the Oil Spill in the Gulf?" for a moment (although I did stop and read it and so it did serve its alluring purpose), and note the ultimate point the author attempts to make : nepotism is at blame for the oil spill and corporate finance going awry.

A GAO report I read recently regarding a Navy ERP project comes unwittingly, but unsurprisingly, to mind. The GAO recommended in a previous report, in 2005, that the Navy ERP Program office institute a IV&V function as a business best practice and to contribute to its program's success. IV&V being "independent verification and validation" assessment of Navy ERP to Navy and DOD management.

ERP implementations are notoriously difficult, and even more so in the federal space with its unique business practices, controversial replacement of long-lived and dearly loved legacy systems, and the cornucopia of diverse contractor and consulting firms that can lead to managerial cluster#*@! . Independent verification and validation that the new system is implemented right seems the least you might do, right? Currently this IV&V function is met by contractors who report to Navy ERP's release manager. This is kind of like filling out my own performance assessment form - or inspection sheet.

The fact is this is not an "independent" team, and all their findings are questionable. It is interesting to note that the contractors involved in performing the IV&V, also help run the local IT framework and on-site facilities maintenance. Maybe we should hire a truly independent group who all don't live and work on-site, and that actually report to someone other than the program management itself.

**I admit the corollary is not strong in this particular instance, that nepotism is to blame for how the IV&V was hired. But let's use a "broken-window" policy here.

Ads and Gov 2.0

2010-04-13T11:06:00.004-04:00

From an interview with a co-founder of SeeClickFix on O'Reilly Radar, as to how SeeClick earns its money:
"A piece of our revenue model is in sponsorship and advertising. A piece of our revenue model is software as a service, whereby we're selling the customization of our application as well as custom iPhone, Android and Blackberry applications...We also have SeeClickFix Pro, which is a dashboard with user licenses for tracking and acknowledging the issues and backing them up in Excel format."

I'm interested to see where they project most of their revenue coming from in the future. Will it be advertising - the route that most companies have determined will be the (irritating) vision of the future of the Web? Or will it be licenses - the tried and true approach taken by most successful software companies today (i.e. Microsoft, Oracle, SAP)?

A Message From Downloader's Insurance Company

2010-03-31T14:02:00.008-04:00

Movie downloaders to be identified by IP and individually subpoenaed.

Hey Netizens! Getting tired of having to pay for books, music and movies entangled with crappy DRM? Exhausted with the limitations against being able to purchase a song, than restricted to what devices you can move it too? Exasperated with the fact that every media retailer is trying to lock you into some hardware device at the same time they're selling you a song or friggin' book?

Well worry NO MORE! Bit Torrent to the RESCUE.

I know you might saying to yourself - "Hey Bit Torrent sounds cool - all the cool kids do it - but I don't want to be sued. I'm not a mother of three, working two jobs, who will earn the sympathy of the EFF to help pay for my court fees to fight the potential lawsuit."

Downloader's Insurance Company HAS YOU COVERED! For a low monthly premium, you'll never have to worry about being sued by the MPAA again!

It is this simple:
- Sign up now for Downloader's Insurance
- Pay your monthly premium on time
- Tell your friends
- AND KEEP DOWNLOADING!

And if you are one of the randomly selected IP addresses to be found torrenting media that is gripped in the corpse-like grip of the MPAA, and end up getting a subpoena in the mail - NO WORRIES!

Just return the letter and select the option to "Settle." Downloader's Insurance will pay the settlement fee, and you'll return on your way to MORE DOWNLOADING !

Sign up NOW!

Agency Efficiency and Contest Money

2010-03-30T10:55:00.005-04:00

OMB sent out a memo encouraging federal agencies to conduct contests to spur innovation. Think the X-Prize for commercial spaceflight or the 2005 contest for a Space Elevator.

What's interesting - to anyone sufficiently geeky to get excited about procurement authority- is section E. Section E explicitly states that agencies can "conduct a procurement in a contest-like manner to encourage greater innovation and private sector participation, when the payment of a prize is for a good or service for the benefit of the government." This agency would then use existing procurement authority to pay out the prize.

It is a common problem, in my mind, that federal agencies are discouraged from not completely exhausting their budget in a given year. Any budget you don't spend, you lose. It is almost diametrically opposed to what would occur in the private sector - where savings are looked kindly upon and can lead to performance bonuses for the savers.

Agencies end up blowing money on inconsequential items or services, whereas here, you have OMB providing a terrific alternative. How about a year-end contest(s) where all budget saved is turned into contest money? You might even encourage an agency to save procurement authority by running their business more efficiently during the course of the year, so that it can turn around and funnel it into innovation contests at year-end. Win-win!

2010-03-29T18:29:00.004-04:00

Sunlight Labs is offering a $5K prize for better data visualization of complicated government data. A great headline and idea however I think it'll remain just that.

We need to get MORE USEFUL data visualization apps out there. Useful for who, you may ask. Well, how about for our government employees? Or are they being force fed through centralized government agencies that control their information technology needs? How about encouraging the proliferation of new technologies and practices?

Times are changing, and its less about doing IT work OR doing Other Work, than it is doing Other Work with IT TOOLS. Its changing the approach to work - expand your toolset and do your job a little better - and also coming up with better visualization apps.

Sunlight and others should definitely still encourage these contests. Make cool tools, better tools, for people to use. Heck, some of these may even be applicable for a government employee to help do their job. But perhaps we should also investigate whether or not these people are ready to use them.

My Stance on stance

2010-03-10T21:52:00.006-05:00

Sometimes I think posturing, or "to act in affected or artificial manner," can be one of the most dangerous threats to a software development project. Especially one that deals in the public sector. In the Federal government space, where there are numerous agencies, regulatory bodies, contracting companies, management consultants and bureaucrats working towards implementing a software solution of exceeding complexity, to act in affected or artificial manner can go a long way towards threatening the success of the project.

Consultants may posture and bristle at other consultants encroaching on their turf, with no less aggression than a gang-banging Crip making the wrong turn into Blood territory. Contracting firms will posture to ensure the sale of their labor and services, and will play politics to obtain lucrative contracts. And bureaucrats will posture to best exude their seniority and expert position, to make that final determination that the technical solution is befitting of their blessing, and avoid the whole "working together" concept.

Of course this type of artificial stance only seems to be there for offensive reasons - but it can also be defensive. It could take the form of finger pointing in emails and during meetings - where instead of focusing on how to correct a given problem, precious development time is wasted on determining who is at fault, or responsible, for correcting a potential error. This environment only deters people from sharing problems for fear of losing face, and fosters hostility and mistrust, two things that can slow down and even prevent communication between parties.

Taking responsibility, focusing in issue resolution with posturing, and a strong work ethic are much preferable values to aspire to in one's stance.

Policing, revenues and the citizenry

2010-03-10T21:23:00.005-05:00

Coming in via Instapundit is a link about increased traffic policing in Knoxville, that supposedly geared towards increasing revenues for cities and states. The linked article describes the police spokesperson's response when asked to address the accusation: "We do not respond to blog postings."

The dialogue goes on, to include the spokesperson mention "As far as responding to blogs, we never have responded as a department. City Council members know how and who to contact at the KPD to get answers to their questions. And believe me, they have never been shy about requesting information or clarification on our policies, practices and crime incidents."

Would it behoove this person instead to point the question to a City Council member, the appropriate point of contact, who can then go ahead request information and clarification on this alleged practice? Is the City Council member the proper channel for the citizenry to communicate questions and concerns to the police?

Its my opinion that as agents in the public service, the police ought to make themselves available for responding to the citizenry, not just their elected political representatives. In this manner, the common citizen can voice concerns directly, online, just as they would if they were to walk into a police station downtown. Those protecting the polis can communicate with their inhabitants.

Share the point of contact at the KPD's email on your website. Sure this person will require a good spam filter and relegate a portion of their day cleaning the good messages from the loony ones, but hey, that's a good description of anyone in the corporate world's job first thing in the morning.

Innovating from the inside

2010-03-06T09:47:00.007-05:00

Federal CIO Vivek Kundra recently delivered a speech to the University of Washington's (Seattle) Evans School of Public Affairs.

"When Kundra came to the job from his previous position as CIO for the District of Columbia, he discovered that the rule for giving government employees BlackBerry devices was based on the number of years they had worked in the government. "That's a perverse incentive," he noted. Instead, it would be more appropriate to dole out the phones based on the worker's role in the government and their need to access information, he said."

This is an interesting point that touches upon the government's penchant for selecting and promoting based on seniority. Most promotion decisions are based on the number of years worked rather than on an employee's merit. This may be influenced by the highly unionized labor environment in the public sector, which typically values years of service over employee capability. I would set aside claims of "ageism" for another post.

But once an organization sets precedent that promotions will be due to years of service rather than accomplishment, this takes away motivation for individual employees to work hard and smartly. Rather, they are rewarded for taking cues from their management and following normal procedure. Where is the incentive for innovation?

This would require a radical overhaul of government organization. But it would provide rewards and motivation for federal employees to innovate from the inside. And a small aside..

"The government has also been examining its deployment of data centers. In the past several years, it has increased the number of data centers from 432 to more than 1,100, even as most private-sector companies are drastically reducing the number of data centers they run. "It takes away the energy and focus on what CIOs should be doing, which is, 'How do we serve you better rather than building another data center?'" he said."

This is a bit of a misnomer I'd think - the federal government probably has more restrictions about where its data resides than does Amazon.com. Whereas Amazon can reduce its domestic data center by outsourcing to a cheap off-shore entity, the government requires U.S. citizens on U.S. soil to watch over its data.

Online Heroes

2010-03-01T11:11:00.003-05:00

Interesting approach to solving some of Africa's problems through online "gaming." The article dubs it an ARG , except this one has pro-social goals as the game's objectives.

Government Help Desk

2010-02-25T11:44:00.010-05:00

Accountability is a word bandied about by policy makers, pundits, and the private sector all the time when speaking about better governance. Yet what does it truly mean to be accountable? Areas of responsibility in government are fairly well defined - most of the time. In those areas, workers are competent to follow up. However, there needs to be a way of assigning accountability, and then a way of following up to ensure problems are resolved in a timely manner.

A help desk ticket system helps to do that. It already exists within many government agencies to assist with IT issues. A problem is identified by an end-user, they log in a help desk ticket, it is assigned to the proper person, then the problem is followed up with and resolved. This type of system was likely adopted from the private sector where efficient response times are a must. A help desk system also provides a log for future problem resolution, which is a boon in and of itself.

Help desks can assist with inter-departmental and inter-agency problems that may cross functional areas. Determining accounting crosswalks for a DoD entity's logistic transaction (i.e. receipt of material into inventory) for an enterprise IT solution is an example. The accounting crosswalk requires input from numerous financial entities, such as FMO and perhaps DFAS, and then communication back to the DoD entity to ensure compliance. Technical system issues non-withstanding - which can make compliance much more difficult if not impossible - the DoD entity then follows through with applying the crosswalk.

But how does the financial entity know there is an issue in the first place? Through a point of contact who may or may not be the most efficient or proactive person? Why is there not some sort of help desk ticket system so that problems can be identified, accounted for, then followed up with? This is basic customer service.

Without a help desk system between agencies, problems can go without recognition or acknowledgement. Or perhaps, in some ways even more inefficiently, can be worked with fervor by one individual - then upon their departure (reason is immaterial) - all their efforts go to waste.

Now, there are certain applications like SeeClickFix and CitySourced that are rudimentary ways to identify problems for state/local governments. I like the idea behind these apps, and I think they are a good start, but they lack a proper framework in which to make specific people/agencies accountable for getting problems resolved. They also lack ways in which to assign levels of criticality, and carry data so that problem tickets can be assigned and re-assigned as necessary. Without these added areas of functionality, issues remain unaccountable - and likely unresolved.

Gov 2.0 - Smarter Government

2010-02-24T10:37:00.006-05:00

Instead of rehashing and redefining the term, I will use my own judgement for what the term means.

Gov 2.0: Using technology to improve government.

To that end, there appears to be some strong support from the administration to follow through and fund ventures that "accelerate new cross-governmental computing strategies, such as cloud computing, data center consolidation and enterprisewide support systems." OMB has requested $50 million to do just that. Of course when G.W. asked for $35 million, he only got back $3.5 million. Still, I would say the media attention of late, i.e. the O'Reilly Summit , means that there is growing public support for smarter government.

Maybe that'd be a better name for Gov 2.0 which sounds like some shoddy application I am forced to use at work and simply detest. Smart Gov? SGov? Public Works 2.0? ... (beginning to sound like Monopoly re-branded for Gen Z kids)..

Software foglets

2009-10-04T11:43:00.007-04:00

What say software takes a page from nanotechnology.

Namely: foglets.

Take some infinitesimally small objects good at just a couple of things: moving about, taking orders, and sharing information with other infinitesimally small objects. For the sake of efficiency and to avoid mix-up, call them cogs. Cogs move about and line themselves up into structures like molecules that comprise proteins that eventually fold into shapes that are so complex, supercomputers have a tough time predicting and following the act. These cogs form up into keys, locks, interfaces, applications - basically anything you can describe.

Would you have to know how best to line them up? Or have them form structure? No! The whole point is to let them do their job. But how to get these little guys to do that? Where does a sense of organization come into play, how do they follow the requirements list, know where their overall status is, etc.

Individually these cogs are rather stupid. Each has a simple task - go here, stop here, carry this bit of information, and pass it on to your friends. Many may just simply be sitting there to help form a lattice structure the rest of the application rests upon. So each with its own task - multiplied over and over, and you no longer see cogs, but rather mountains. Its not an ant-hill - its an ant-mountain ('hill' is so humano-centric).

class cog {

initialize(name,status,position)

list = list(friends_list)

do_stuff(data)

move()

replicate()

whoami()

whatami()

transform()

}

I can see more functions. But basically these cogs ought to be able to bootstrap themselves together, look around and link up with other cogs and become "their friends." Friends work together on the same team. So you have a list of requirements - something to complete. Now describe it in detail so that the cogs can begin to work on it. You don't have to control the number of cogs, simply point them at the task that needs completion and let them "work." If the work is going slowly, make them more friends. If you're busy, grant them the ability to create their own friends.

Now this is where it gets a bit tricky. Because then you'll have to change the status amongst the cogs, so that some are "leader" cogs, and others are "follower" cogs. Initially, a cog may look around and search for a leader. It doesn't find one? Then it instantly becomes a leader. Then it takes on the capabilities and powers of a leader.

A leader might have the following abilities: analyze_requirement, select_requirement, look_for_team, create_follower, assign_follower, destroy_follower, etc.

I'll expand on this a bit more, but I think I'll set this up in a simple environment. The key is to ensure you don't have cogs running amuck - creating themselves non-stop. Maybe for now some upper limit on their number is necessary until I think this part through.

Game post redux

2009-09-27T21:11:00.004-04:00

Subject: An idea about getting the next generation online

Dear Nick,
I recently read your book, Being Digital, and have seen your TED talks on YouTube. They’ve given me an idea I’d like to share with you: People have an assumption that games only entertain, or at best, educate the end-user (i.e. the player). However, I believe games have the capacity to provide answers to questions posed by researchers in economics, computer science, behavioral science and more. While helping the academic community, we could also help get laptops into the hands of children who can’t afford them, through your OLPC program.

Computer games provide an entertainment platform enjoyed by millions of people all over the world. Sid Meier’s Civilization, an example from the real-time strategy genre, is the type of game where players assume the role of a nation-state and develop infrastructure, build a military, research technology, and cultivate diplomatic ties with other nation-states. Nation-states are pitted against other nation-states, and with the advent of online gaming over the Internet, this typically means human players versus human players.

Now what if a game, like Civilization, were to integrate real-world data during game play? What if you tied in-game “weapons,” such as fiscal and monetary policy, to projected benefits? What if choices made in-game had outcomes that hinge on different factors like time and level of implementation? For example: having X amount of workers at full employment, at Y technology level, will deliver Z amount of financial benefits. These benefits then allow for additional technological advances, military upgrade, asset purchases, and/or trade advantages.

Each player implements a slightly different model, and the best one wins. You could even set up differing gaming scenarios where “weapons” have different effects, thereby settling the controversies of whether these projected benefits are accurate. The final result is a gaming-research application executing millions of human interactions, testing pertinent scientific research questions asked by the world’s leading scientists?

Data collected from the online play would then be available for academic study. Economists would have the ability to develop models and test them. Computer scientists, especially those working in artificial intelligence, would have invaluable data to analyze and work with. The possibilities are vast. And financial gains can be used to help get more of these laptops out to more children.

Game development, essentially the central tool for data collection, may be contracted to an existing game development company like EA or Blizzard. Perhaps they’d be interested in a partnership where they could subsidize the cost of the laptop while introducing the next generation to their IP. And what a philanthropic gesture that would make!

I can attest to your goal of one laptop per child, having been fortunate to having a computer in my household growing up. There is nothing quite as powerful a tool to help educate and inspire children, and propel them into the careers they choose.

So what do you think ?

Best Regards,
Mr Richards

People have gotten the concept of games for kids wrong.

2009-09-19T12:25:00.009-04:00

What I mean is that people (adults) have decided that games are simply for entertainment, or at best, for instructional value. But what about games that can instruct us ? (adults)

A popular science fiction novel, Ender's Game, poses a scenario where children are playing a game with real-world results. It is enjoyable and the hook at the end is teriffic. This story shows an extreme of perhaps a not-so fictional scenario. It brings up certain ideas that might be applied IRL, AFK. What if a game was designed, perhaps as a port from an existing real-time strategy game (RTS), to extract meaningful data ?

RTS's are games I grew up with. My first exposure was via the venerable Dune 2, a game based more so on the film (although they left out the flying Baron – thankfully ), than the books by Frank Herbert. The gist was you'd pick from three factions: the blue, the green, and the red. Each had its own strengths, weaknesses, and special abilities. Players had to hunt for resources, set up industrial centers, and develop military options to protect and attack their enemies (which was pretty much the other colors). The game had some flaws as the primary strategy was to simply sit in one spot, amass a legion of tanks, and then go stomp on your enemy. Takes a page straight out of the 19th Century Way of Military Conquest. (not a real book)

Another interesting game I grew up with was Civilization, by Sid Meier. I may not have to say much about this game – it is considered the Holy Grail by most people having grown up with computers in the 80s and 90s. The premise was similar, but based on real world civilizations, and was presented as a model taking a human tribe from the Stone Age to the Space Age. This game gave you way more complexity than Dune, since it factored in diplomacy, culture, social and technological advances into the mix. Of course you could still amass a bunch of tanks and stomp your enemy if you so chose.

Now what if a game was granted more complexity in a transparent way to gamers, in that it kept the fun parts, while extracting some really good data from the outcomes by inserting some real-world data into the gameplay. Now add into the mix a "Player vs Player" (PvP) element, where you'd add real inputs and economic data. For example, intial start conditions for a match would be taken from existing inputs/resource data that we get from the U.S. Department of Labor. Scale it down based on the player count or scenario (ex. North America).

Tie projected benefits for certain "weapons" (financial policy, industrial advancements) to certain outcomes (time and level of implementation). Having x amount of workers at full employment, at current technology level, will deliver y amount of benefits. Each player would implement a slightly different economic model, and the one that does best “wins.”

I admit that even projecting these benefits can be a controversial task - so set up different scenarios where these "weapons" have different effects. But is this not the best simulation you can run where you have literally millions of computers running the best software (kids), executing in parallel ?

People are playing online matches today against each other all the time. Halo 3 was released in September 2007. More than 1 billion matches were played by March 2009. Admittedly this is a different type of game, with perhaps a different type of devotee - but if this new game were to have a fraction of those numbers - it would equal a wealth of data on competing economic models.

Challenges include making this as real a simulation as possible, while retaining its fun factor to keep kids, adults, dogs, playing it. I think the game should be delivered free so that the widest audience is brought in – because you never know who will add in that valuable contribution that makes this whole venture worthwhile.

Distribution could be online, or perhaps as an application loaded on an OLPC. It would be installed into the folder right next to Solitaire and Minesweeper. Why not have Electronic Arts or Blizzard develop the application and bankroll the laptop - you're introducing millions of children to your IP - as well as pursuing the greatest philontropic, PR move at the same time.

I think this data would be of extremely potent use to economists, sociologists, computer scientists, and policy makers.

Enterprise solutions as expert systems

2009-09-18T22:00:00.005-04:00

The U.S. Federal government's annual budget for information technology is apparently around 75 BILLION dollars. So, a couple of heavy hitters in the software vendor world, met up to discuss the Federal government and its interest in cloud computing. It even has an App store now (but does it have Scrabulous? Seriously, why was Facebook at that meeting?).

I am not going to argue today over how much budget is being spent on IT, whether the government is getting a return on investment, or how contractors make way too much money in this space (I'll do so in later posts). What I do want to point out is whether its a smart move to just assume you're plugging in software solutions here.

Its not as simple as getting requirements, putting down a design, then coding it. Although that would be super nice.

The government is a changing landscape - its ruled by a couple of financial and regulatory bodies (i.e. Treasury, OSD ) - that mandate it follow certain rules when it goes about business. Some government agencies do not have the best track record when it comes to being compliant with regulations.

So Congress got in their faces. It told them you better be financially compliant.

The government doesn't run business like Widget Inc. Its not in it for the profits - its in it to meet its mission. That might be to support the support the Warfighter (Army, Navy, Air Force) or just the Fleet (Navy). "Support" means doing business the same way, no change, year in and year out. Organizational and business process changes aren't popular, less you peeve off Generals and Admirals (at least that is how at works at the Department of Defense).

To be brief, SAP and other commercial software solutions are picked as being the best way to please Congress and the Generals and Admirals. Its selected, designed, and implemented to perform the same functions as the legacy system it is replacing. This is kind of like buying a Prius, then monkeying around with the fuel system so it gets the same mileage as that old Ford Taurus you're replacing it with.

To me, implementing a solution for the Federal gov, using commercial software like SAP, is more closely matched with designing an expert system. You have a lot of end-users who typically rely on a system or some subject matter experts to make decisions. These systems rule financial, logistics, procurement and planning questions.

Therefore, its my suggestion that the design and implementation of these systems occur as one would set up an expert system. However that goes.

Cash has outlived its usefulness

2009-09-18T21:06:00.007-04:00

Sure its easy to use, nice to have - might even score some points when you flash it to the lady across from you at the bar. But could it do more than simply transfer your wealth into someone else's pocket ?

What if cash carried an expiration date? Not a completely new idea apparently. John Keynes had some notion about it, and as recently as 1999, it was flouted about by Marvin Goodfriend, then VP at the Federal Reserve, to 'discourage "hoarding" currency, deter black market and criminal activities, and boost economic stability during deflationary periods when interest rates hover near zero.' The penalty of spending "old cash" would be a carry tax.

Ok, so it had its critics, like Ron Paul and others.

But what if the idea of expiring cash has some merit ? Namely, to keep money flowing through local economies for goods, services, and start-ups. Yeah, start-ups. By stamping an expiration date on this New Cash, you prompt people to spend it before it goes.. worthless ? Or perhaps devalued by some percentage. In either case, you'd be likelier to spend it while its worth more, right?

You decide to put this cash to work, paying for fresh groceries instead of throwing stuff into the freezer for six months. Pay for landscapers to mow the lawn - might as well - the cash will be no good next week.

Or you want to get a washing machine, since you have kids and you have no other alternative - those rugrats are getting stains on their Osh-Kosh overalls every damn day. Go get that machine - now!

Maybe you decide instead to do some investing, because you can do that with expiring cash too. You actually get some tax breaks for using it in an investment. Its a no-brainer, really. So you do your research, and think to yourself that Solar Panel Corp, a new start-up, is trying to create cool solar panels that would be way more efficient than existing ones.

So let's say you invest your expiring dollars, with the idea that any future revenues would come back to you as plain, old dollars you keep forever. The inventor gets the money to try out the invention, and you get rich. Win-win ?

Sure there are details to work out. There is testing to be done as well. Maybe sell this model to some isolated community somewhere, throw them financial incentives for following through, and see if it works. (Selling an economic model might even be a whole other blog post as it is.. so if you're a large research firm interested in any of this - contact me - and we'll see if we can't get some New Cash in circulation )