Well, almost. My team and our product made it into 3/20 issue of TIME magazine. Check us out.
I think this one is going on the refrigerator...
Tuesday, March 14, 2006
Monday, March 13, 2006
Information overload
I just spent most of the day studying more marketing, and reading up on Google, their analyst day slides, the various aliases, and blogs. Talk about overwhelming information, whew. But it is exciting and stimulating. This certainly makes my day job look boring as all hell when I have to get in tomorrow to write about...ugh, video drivers. F*ck, It's getting harder and harder to get up these days for work.
The analyst day slides were interesting, but still not as interesting as Batelle's forecasting of possible Google moves. Still, I came away impressed by the company's focus on growing a sound business. The media often paints an image of Google being a bazaar run by engineers where no one knows what's going on, but there is financial discipline. I like the various operational and financial metrics used for measuring performance as well. I think that's a good sign that a company is maturing.
Some of the mentions were interesting, I wonder what Lighthouse is? Hmm...
It is still not clear to me how Google has a competitive advantage when it comes to offline advertising, however. I'm not sure how well Adsense applies to print and radio advertising, you'd have to digitize all the content first. The only advantage Google offers is leveling the playing field by introducing the auction model to advertising, essentially cutting out the middle man (advertising agencies). But in print/radio media where traditional advertising is deeply entrenched, I'm not sure how well that'll play. It's also biting the hands that feeds them, as advertising firms have the traditioanl relationships w/ all the big named accounts. But then again, I'm still a novice about this space so I can be way off.
Too tired to write more, need to go home and sleep.
Oh lastly, I benched 175 today! And that's at an end of an inverted routine as well (8x 125lb, 6x 135lb, 4x 145lb, 3x 155lb). Quite proud of myself. I wonder if I could possibly break 200lb this year?
The analyst day slides were interesting, but still not as interesting as Batelle's forecasting of possible Google moves. Still, I came away impressed by the company's focus on growing a sound business. The media often paints an image of Google being a bazaar run by engineers where no one knows what's going on, but there is financial discipline. I like the various operational and financial metrics used for measuring performance as well. I think that's a good sign that a company is maturing.
Some of the mentions were interesting, I wonder what Lighthouse is? Hmm...
It is still not clear to me how Google has a competitive advantage when it comes to offline advertising, however. I'm not sure how well Adsense applies to print and radio advertising, you'd have to digitize all the content first. The only advantage Google offers is leveling the playing field by introducing the auction model to advertising, essentially cutting out the middle man (advertising agencies). But in print/radio media where traditional advertising is deeply entrenched, I'm not sure how well that'll play. It's also biting the hands that feeds them, as advertising firms have the traditioanl relationships w/ all the big named accounts. But then again, I'm still a novice about this space so I can be way off.
Too tired to write more, need to go home and sleep.
Oh lastly, I benched 175 today! And that's at an end of an inverted routine as well (8x 125lb, 6x 135lb, 4x 145lb, 3x 155lb). Quite proud of myself. I wonder if I could possibly break 200lb this year?
Saturday, March 11, 2006
On marketing and diamonds
OK, usually I think marketing training and books are a waste of time; most of the time the material just seem like common sense to me. While I still don't think it's rocket science, I am gaining have a little more respect for the discipline now.
Consider this:
Frightening, isn't it? Now millions of men everywhere like myself will have De Beers to thank when we plunk down that 3-6mo salary savings on a rock. (OK, OK, it's really for that sparkle in your eyes when we get down on one knee, but still).
And now what are they working on now that they've convinced the women of the world that diamonds are a symbol of love?
Genius, I tell you. Pure genius. You gotta hand it to these guys. I have a newfound respect for marketers now.
Consider this:
In 1932, the global market for diamonds was $100,000. De Beers changed that forever by altering the perception of the purpose of diamonds. They launched a deliberate campaign to create an association in the minds of young men that diamonds are a gift of love, and an association in the minds of young women that diamonds are an essential part of romance and marriage. Their strategy included seminars on diamonds to high school students, news stories about celebrity romances and their diamonds, and strategic product placements in Hollywood movies such as “Gentlemen Prefer Blondes” and “Diamonds are Forever.” So how did the strategy work?
More than 100 million women now wear diamonds.
Over 75% percent of brides receive a diamond ring.
The market has grown to 50 billion dollars.
De Beers controls two thirds of the market.
Frightening, isn't it? Now millions of men everywhere like myself will have De Beers to thank when we plunk down that 3-6mo salary savings on a rock. (OK, OK, it's really for that sparkle in your eyes when we get down on one knee, but still).
And now what are they working on now that they've convinced the women of the world that diamonds are a symbol of love?
The new De Beers campaign targets women's right hands. The left hand says "we", the right hand says "me." The message is that even if you are married you can still make a statement with your other hand. And, if you are not married, you will still want to make a statement--and you can make a statement of independence with your right hand. This new campaign is targeting emotions, changing perceptions, and redefining the category once again.
"Women of the world. Raise your right hand."
Genius, I tell you. Pure genius. You gotta hand it to these guys. I have a newfound respect for marketers now.
Friday, March 10, 2006
Pace of change
Talk about accelerating pace of change...geez. I was feeling OK today, still doing all my work and everything, but then started reading some blogs, doing some puzzles to prepare tonight and now I'm feeling it a little bit. I hate to use the word "stressed" cuz it makes me feel like a wimp, but let's just say it'll be a little harder to fall asleep tonight. It's like being back in school all over again, that frantic period when you're about to graduate, trying to keep all the balls in the air, lest one of them fall. After working for a while I guess you just turn on autopilot and aren't exercising your brains anymore, and now suddenly I have to get it cranking again. It's gonna be intense.
Thursday, March 09, 2006
Leaks...and then some
Wow, has everyone seen this? I feel robbed. :(
******
holy crappola, i didn't realize my link showed up on mini's trackback. good god, i yanked the link asap. don't want that mass of people over here.
******
holy crappola, i didn't realize my link showed up on mini's trackback. good god, i yanked the link asap. don't want that mass of people over here.
Thursday, March 02, 2006
Musings on "The Search" and other ramblings
I'm reading John Batelle's "The Search" right now, about 1/3 way through it. I don't think there is any self-respecting techie who can read the story of Sergey and Page and not get completely fired up. It's basically every wannabe entrepreneur's wet dream come true. Reading through history of all the incredible innovation that came out of Stanford, from Excite, to Yahoo, to Google, to god knows what's next, it reminded me what it was like being there at that time. The electricity in the air, when there was a startup job fair every other week, competiting ads in the Daily with ridiculous offers, business plan competitions getting more hype than March Madness (well, almost. we sucked after I got in), free t-shirts everywhere, and everyone trying to score that coveted internship. It reminded me that at one point, I had that same passion, that same fire of wanting to change the world. To be a part of something from the beginning and believe in it so much, that I was willing to eat, breath, and sleep it. I suppose I am trying to recapture that kind of passion in my life. Do I still have it? Do I still have what it takes?
This also made me think about how things turn out in Life in ironic ways. I remember when I was applying to college, I actually really really wanted to go to MIT, and I was bitterly disappointed when I was waitlisted. Stanford was my top choice too, it probably would've been a toss-up between the two had I gotten into both. But now in retrospect, I would not give up going to Stanford for the world. That was absolutely the best place for me, to be there from '98 to '02, witnessing the bubble grow and then burst and to take in that atmosphere. I don't think I'm exaggerating when I say that had a tremendous impact on my development as a person. But I would never have experienced this had I gone to MIT. Sigh, why can't foresight be as clear as hindsight?
So that was a long winded way of convincing myself, maybe something that I'm bitterly regretting now may turn out to hold something else for me in turn? Or maybe not :) But I guess that's all part of life.
As I've said previously, things are now in motion and accelerating at a breakneck pace. For the first time, I have zero cycles left at work, which is rare for me since my upperbound is literally every waking minute. While it's not all work, I'm still exhausted. I went home at 5am last night and had to pull myself up for work at 9am...almost reminds me of college again :) Maybe I should be careful what I wish for.
It is nice to be firing on all cycles again. I have to say, I was refreshing my knowledge of basic bayesian statistics last night. I swear, I could hear the gears grinding and groaning as I was slowly firing up that dormant machine upstairs again. It definitely took a while, at first I couldn't even remember the theorems. But man did it feel good when it all came back. It's nice to know I've still got it, at least some of it.
It's also been frustrating trying to prove myself to skeptics who doubt my business acumen or management ability. I understand their concerns, but at the same time, it really is not rocket science. Especially at the product level. Sorry if I sound full of myself, but if I've more than proven myself to be smart enough to completely pick up being a PM in a field I did not study, I find it difficult to imagine I could not do something similar. Yet another challenge of professional working life I supposed. I find that often the hardest part is not doing the job, but rather "showing" that you can do the job. They sound the same but are actually quite different, and this perception management part probably frustrates me much more than actual execution itself.
Sorry, I wish I could be less vague, but there is no access control on this blog. I really wish blogger had that feature. :(
This also made me think about how things turn out in Life in ironic ways. I remember when I was applying to college, I actually really really wanted to go to MIT, and I was bitterly disappointed when I was waitlisted. Stanford was my top choice too, it probably would've been a toss-up between the two had I gotten into both. But now in retrospect, I would not give up going to Stanford for the world. That was absolutely the best place for me, to be there from '98 to '02, witnessing the bubble grow and then burst and to take in that atmosphere. I don't think I'm exaggerating when I say that had a tremendous impact on my development as a person. But I would never have experienced this had I gone to MIT. Sigh, why can't foresight be as clear as hindsight?
So that was a long winded way of convincing myself, maybe something that I'm bitterly regretting now may turn out to hold something else for me in turn? Or maybe not :) But I guess that's all part of life.
As I've said previously, things are now in motion and accelerating at a breakneck pace. For the first time, I have zero cycles left at work, which is rare for me since my upperbound is literally every waking minute. While it's not all work, I'm still exhausted. I went home at 5am last night and had to pull myself up for work at 9am...almost reminds me of college again :) Maybe I should be careful what I wish for.
It is nice to be firing on all cycles again. I have to say, I was refreshing my knowledge of basic bayesian statistics last night. I swear, I could hear the gears grinding and groaning as I was slowly firing up that dormant machine upstairs again. It definitely took a while, at first I couldn't even remember the theorems. But man did it feel good when it all came back. It's nice to know I've still got it, at least some of it.
It's also been frustrating trying to prove myself to skeptics who doubt my business acumen or management ability. I understand their concerns, but at the same time, it really is not rocket science. Especially at the product level. Sorry if I sound full of myself, but if I've more than proven myself to be smart enough to completely pick up being a PM in a field I did not study, I find it difficult to imagine I could not do something similar. Yet another challenge of professional working life I supposed. I find that often the hardest part is not doing the job, but rather "showing" that you can do the job. They sound the same but are actually quite different, and this perception management part probably frustrates me much more than actual execution itself.
Sorry, I wish I could be less vague, but there is no access control on this blog. I really wish blogger had that feature. :(
Tuesday, February 07, 2006
Tipping points
In Malcolm Gladwell's "Tipping Point", there is a concept of "tipping point" - a point where critical mass or momentum propels tremendous change into reality. Sometimes called "strategic inflection", "chasm", or "singularity" from other business and science literature. I wonder, if there are tipping points in our personal life too. Every so often, my life comes to a tipping point, where I can feel it accelerate into change. Perhaps I am at that point again now, except this time, instead of coming to a fork where I can somewhat see where the various paths lead, I've come to a cliff beyond which is the vast unknown. I can feel myself accelerating faster and faster toward this point of no return. It came earlier than I expected, and I'm not sure if I feel ready for it. But then again, are we ever ready for these things? All I know is, six months from now, my life will be very, very different than what it is today. This is quite new to me. For much of my life, I have taken comfort in mapping out what I want my future to be and following it. Whether it was where I wanted to go to school, the people I wanted to meet, the places I wanted to go or the career I wanted to have. Through my efforts (small factor) and good fortune (large factor), for the most part, things have not strayed that far off my expectations. I suppose last year was the first time when I have really felt Life taking a dramatic, unexpected turn off "course", beyond my control and against all my wishes. That changed my life forever. But perhaps it was a lesson I needed to learn. To accept the limitations of our feeble attempts to create a master plan, to chart a known course, to impose our will upon Life. And not only accept it, but learn to embrace it. Perhaps to be free is not to be omniscient and omnipotent, for they instead burden us with the desire and responsibility to forever design, calculate, and execute our futures. Then there's really no "freedom" left, since everything is known, and everything can be done. Perhaps true freedom only comes from embracing the unknown, liberating myself from the anxiety and neurosis of deciphering and planning the future, since despite my best efforts, Life never ceases to surprise me.
I think I am already quite different than I was six months ago; the transformation began then, but it was largely inward. And now it's about to manifest itself outwardly. Let's do it baby. You only live once right?
I think I am already quite different than I was six months ago; the transformation began then, but it was largely inward. And now it's about to manifest itself outwardly. Let's do it baby. You only live once right?
Sunday, December 25, 2005
How true
"Relationship development is often understood as a process of mutual- From Malcolm Gladwell's The Tipping Point
self-disclosures," he [Wegner] writes. "Although it is probably more romantic to
cast this process as one of interpersonal revelation and acceptance, it can also
be appreciated as a necessary precursor to transactive memory." Transactive
memory is aprt of what intimacy means. In fact, Wegner argues, it is the loss of
this kind of joint memory that helsp to make divorce so painful. "Divorced
people who suffer drepression and complain of cognitive dysfunciton may be
expressing the loss of their external memery systems," he writes. "They once
were able to discuss their experiences to reach a shared understanding....They
once could count on access to a wide range of storage in their partner, and
this, too, is gone.... The loss of transactive memroy feels like losing a part
of one's own mind."
Indeed, how true.
Saturday, December 17, 2005
Friday, December 16, 2005
Yay for another couple!
Another one of my friends just got engaged! Congratulations to A and J, I am so happy for you guys! I wish you the best as you start a new journey in life together. Wow, that is wonderful news.
Tuesday, December 06, 2005
what do I know?
Hmm, you all don't seen very interested in my non-tech writings, no one ever seems to comment on them. Sadness, I really do think (hope) my musings as a person is much more interesting than my ramblings as a PM or armchair CEO. Well, so be it...I shall indulge you w/ some more technobabble then.
No, really. Believe it or not I spent a lot of time thinking and writing up that post on relationships - much more than whenever I spout off on tech!
********
I was complaining about my overflooding feed list to Huat again the other day, about how I never have enough time to catch up on all my blog reading. Plus I keep subscribing to new blogs as existing blogs keep linking outside and the network keeps expanding. On the other hand, I've been able to keep my inbox at zero for pretty much the last 4 months now, clearing things at the end of the day and it's worked very well. I wonder if there are analogies of email management that can be applied to feeds?
Could one setup some rules to manage how items are prioritized and read? Obviously the difficulties are there are no "to recipient" rules (obviously) and the "by sender" rule is less useful as authors can write about anything under the sun. And rather than grouping into a tree by author, what if you re-sorted items by topic or relevance? Can some kind of contextual analysis be applied to the content, where the machine attempts to parse the feed content and decipher what the feed is about, then sort it for you in terms of importance, or perahps group by topic? Can you apply PageRank to blogs (actually does google or technorati do this already? I may be woefully outdated) but internally, so rather than having to query an external index using some keywords, what if you flipped the index inside out so that the keywords or nexi (plural of nexus?) are exposed first - basically clustering applied to feed items. Again, what I find so valuable about blogging is its conversational and never-ending expansive nature, as blogs keep linking out ad infinitum. What if you not only clustered your subscribed feeds, but also crawled all their outgoing links, and links to those links, and so forth, and clustered that?
I guess what I'm really looking for, in my search for the next big idea, is a tool to visually organize and present this vast web of discussions out there, so that I can easily filter out the nuggets of gold among all the pebbles, and draw my own connections and conclusions. Actually, I bet there is probably already a reader out there like that, I just don't know about it yet...
No, really. Believe it or not I spent a lot of time thinking and writing up that post on relationships - much more than whenever I spout off on tech!
********
I was complaining about my overflooding feed list to Huat again the other day, about how I never have enough time to catch up on all my blog reading. Plus I keep subscribing to new blogs as existing blogs keep linking outside and the network keeps expanding. On the other hand, I've been able to keep my inbox at zero for pretty much the last 4 months now, clearing things at the end of the day and it's worked very well. I wonder if there are analogies of email management that can be applied to feeds?
Could one setup some rules to manage how items are prioritized and read? Obviously the difficulties are there are no "to recipient" rules (obviously) and the "by sender" rule is less useful as authors can write about anything under the sun. And rather than grouping into a tree by author, what if you re-sorted items by topic or relevance? Can some kind of contextual analysis be applied to the content, where the machine attempts to parse the feed content and decipher what the feed is about, then sort it for you in terms of importance, or perahps group by topic? Can you apply PageRank to blogs (actually does google or technorati do this already? I may be woefully outdated) but internally, so rather than having to query an external index using some keywords, what if you flipped the index inside out so that the keywords or nexi (plural of nexus?) are exposed first - basically clustering applied to feed items. Again, what I find so valuable about blogging is its conversational and never-ending expansive nature, as blogs keep linking out ad infinitum. What if you not only clustered your subscribed feeds, but also crawled all their outgoing links, and links to those links, and so forth, and clustered that?
I guess what I'm really looking for, in my search for the next big idea, is a tool to visually organize and present this vast web of discussions out there, so that I can easily filter out the nuggets of gold among all the pebbles, and draw my own connections and conclusions. Actually, I bet there is probably already a reader out there like that, I just don't know about it yet...
Friday, December 02, 2005
Love, marriage, and relationships
Wow, that was a long, unintended hiatus from blogging. I've had a lot that I wanted to get off my chest, but never had the time to complete them all, so I postponed and postponed posting, and meanwhile my thoughts grew and grew. I guess it's finally time to open the floodgates.
Here is something I started on 10/27 and finally just finished -
****************************
I've been buried by work these last two weeks, working like a mad man. Been wanting to get this off my chest for a while, since it's been germinating in my mind for quite some time, and finally have some time to write since I got home before 2am for once.
Seeing some of my coworkers go through divorce recently has made me think quite a bit. I've been working w/ them every day for over a year now, and from what I can see they are, for the most part, decent people. Not perfect, for none of us are, but they are your typical intelligent professional/friendly coworker/adoring father. Not assholes, not bozos, not jerks. Good, decent people. And yet now I see them go through these dragged out, excruciating divorces, where they and their spouses fight over money, kids, property, friends, everything. Which makes me wonder - at one point in their lives, they must have truly loved each other, right? Enough so to have wanted to marry one another, start a family, buy a house, and plan to spend the rest of their lives together. Yet, times goes on, people change, and voila, here we are - you get the house, I get the furniture; you get Cathy on M/W/F, I get her on T/Th/Sa... I'm old enough to know that more than half of marriages end in divorces, so I should be more immune to it not. Yet I'm not. I watch them go through these absolutely excruciating, drawn-out sagas, and it still hits me. Hard. Right here in the middle.
What is true love? What should be our expectations of love, marriage, and relationships? I think my perspective has changed a lot, from my own experiences, my close friends' breakups/marital problems, and now my coworkers' divorces. I think, once upon a time, I believed that if you found someone right for you, and you both truly love each other, you can see yourself being w/ this other person for the rest of your life. That to expect to spend the rest of your life with one other person was not unreasonable. I'm inclined to think the opposite now - I don't think it's impossible, but I do think it's improbable. Am I becoming more jaded? I don't know. Maybe I'm more realistic. Perhaps in this way I am getting older.
I think it's a given that people are constantly changing as times goes on in every way, whether it's interests, personality, disposition…every possible way. Whatever attracted you about this person today, may not hold tomorrow because 1) the other person could change, so he/she's not like that any more, or 2) you could change, so you don't like him/her anymore, or 3) both of you could change. Then the foundation of love is ephemeral at best, since for two people to spend the rest of their lives together, not only do they have to change together, they have to change in a complementary, compatible way. If we take two free flowing lines as an analogy to represent two persons' states of beings, respectively, as these two persons change, these two lines will twist, turn, and weave in all different directions. So for two people to stay together, the two lines will always have to be parallel (within certain margin of error) as they traverse through time. What are the freaking odds of that?!
(forgive me for my inner geek speaking out above there. I got to maintain my engineering street cred somehow)
And what does it really mean when we tell a person, "I love you" or "I want to marry you"? When two people say that to each other, I suppose usually it implicitly carries the commitment to love the other person, and the expectation that love will be reciprocated indefinitely. It is supposed to mean "till death do us apart". Or perhaps that's what pop culture instills in us. Yet, can you hold human beings accountable for a commitment that we inherently cannot uphold? Perhaps whenever we "love" another person, it's because both of us "happen" to have what the other person desires at that moment. But when those conditions change, then love evaporates, naturally. Perhaps in her first few years, she wanted romance, passion, excitement. Maybe it's the spiky hair rockers who really strikes her fancy, or that sullen, inner artist that just brings out her motherly instincts. Then, maybe later on, she needed someone stable and predictable, a good father to raise herfamily, buy a house, etc. But again maybe after another ten years, this nice, stable guy just bores her now. He just doesn't do it anymore, and middle-aged her is angsty at her fleeing life, so once again, she starts to cast that longing, furtive eye at someone who really excites her. Perhaps because I was in grad school, and you were applying to med school, we "fell in love" because it was good timing during our transitional years. You hadn't seen any premeds you really liked, and I'd never met a girl like you. And so we're together. A couple years later, you're in med school, you're changing and looking for someone different, you meet some great doctors, and you're gone and we're apart. It's no one's fault, really. C'est la vie. Life goes on, as always. So what did our relationship really mean? Was it just a byproduct of circumstance, that we both happened to be at the "right" place, at the "right" time, so voila we "fell" in love? So what does commitment in love mean? Does it just mean "I will love you for the foreseeable future"; "till I don't like you, or you don't like me, or we don't like each other anymore"? Is that what it means?
Both NYT and Salon had articles on the trend of serial monogamy and how it reflects the rise of consumerism in modern times (damn I wish I had bookmarked them). The abundance of choice, the rise in our "purchasing power", increase in gender equality, and ubiquity of information - do they all contribute to a more cavalier, shopper's mentality toward love, relationships, and marriage? "If it doesn't fit, then find another one?" Since the traditional economic and social benefits of a committed relationship (including, but not exclusively marriage) are decreasing in importance today, why struggle through a marriage and try to make it work? Why not just separate and find someone else? Maybe you two were good for each other ten years ago. But now? Surely there is a better match for you, and him/her, out there today. Why, look at that young hunky coworker down the hall. Or that cute doubles partner at the tennis club. Or your girlfriend's newly single lawyer friend. Or all those guys on match.com...
We humans are such contradictory animals. On one hand, we crave the stability, the safety of knowing someone who will always love us, no matter what. Someone who's always there for us, who accepts us for who we are. Yet on the other hand, we are constantly changing, and so human relationships could never provide us this stability that we crave. Perhaps this is where some people turn to religion. If there is a God, then He will love me no matter what, right? He will never change and never abandon me, since He is by definition unchanging, right? That's not my answer though, unfortunately. So what is? The happiness of self? That strikes me as a bit narcissistic. So what else is left?
Here is something I started on 10/27 and finally just finished -
****************************
I've been buried by work these last two weeks, working like a mad man. Been wanting to get this off my chest for a while, since it's been germinating in my mind for quite some time, and finally have some time to write since I got home before 2am for once.
Seeing some of my coworkers go through divorce recently has made me think quite a bit. I've been working w/ them every day for over a year now, and from what I can see they are, for the most part, decent people. Not perfect, for none of us are, but they are your typical intelligent professional/friendly coworker/adoring father. Not assholes, not bozos, not jerks. Good, decent people. And yet now I see them go through these dragged out, excruciating divorces, where they and their spouses fight over money, kids, property, friends, everything. Which makes me wonder - at one point in their lives, they must have truly loved each other, right? Enough so to have wanted to marry one another, start a family, buy a house, and plan to spend the rest of their lives together. Yet, times goes on, people change, and voila, here we are - you get the house, I get the furniture; you get Cathy on M/W/F, I get her on T/Th/Sa... I'm old enough to know that more than half of marriages end in divorces, so I should be more immune to it not. Yet I'm not. I watch them go through these absolutely excruciating, drawn-out sagas, and it still hits me. Hard. Right here in the middle.
What is true love? What should be our expectations of love, marriage, and relationships? I think my perspective has changed a lot, from my own experiences, my close friends' breakups/marital problems, and now my coworkers' divorces. I think, once upon a time, I believed that if you found someone right for you, and you both truly love each other, you can see yourself being w/ this other person for the rest of your life. That to expect to spend the rest of your life with one other person was not unreasonable. I'm inclined to think the opposite now - I don't think it's impossible, but I do think it's improbable. Am I becoming more jaded? I don't know. Maybe I'm more realistic. Perhaps in this way I am getting older.
I think it's a given that people are constantly changing as times goes on in every way, whether it's interests, personality, disposition…every possible way. Whatever attracted you about this person today, may not hold tomorrow because 1) the other person could change, so he/she's not like that any more, or 2) you could change, so you don't like him/her anymore, or 3) both of you could change. Then the foundation of love is ephemeral at best, since for two people to spend the rest of their lives together, not only do they have to change together, they have to change in a complementary, compatible way. If we take two free flowing lines as an analogy to represent two persons' states of beings, respectively, as these two persons change, these two lines will twist, turn, and weave in all different directions. So for two people to stay together, the two lines will always have to be parallel (within certain margin of error) as they traverse through time. What are the freaking odds of that?!
(forgive me for my inner geek speaking out above there. I got to maintain my engineering street cred somehow)
And what does it really mean when we tell a person, "I love you" or "I want to marry you"? When two people say that to each other, I suppose usually it implicitly carries the commitment to love the other person, and the expectation that love will be reciprocated indefinitely. It is supposed to mean "till death do us apart". Or perhaps that's what pop culture instills in us. Yet, can you hold human beings accountable for a commitment that we inherently cannot uphold? Perhaps whenever we "love" another person, it's because both of us "happen" to have what the other person desires at that moment. But when those conditions change, then love evaporates, naturally. Perhaps in her first few years, she wanted romance, passion, excitement. Maybe it's the spiky hair rockers who really strikes her fancy, or that sullen, inner artist that just brings out her motherly instincts. Then, maybe later on, she needed someone stable and predictable, a good father to raise herfamily, buy a house, etc. But again maybe after another ten years, this nice, stable guy just bores her now. He just doesn't do it anymore, and middle-aged her is angsty at her fleeing life, so once again, she starts to cast that longing, furtive eye at someone who really excites her. Perhaps because I was in grad school, and you were applying to med school, we "fell in love" because it was good timing during our transitional years. You hadn't seen any premeds you really liked, and I'd never met a girl like you. And so we're together. A couple years later, you're in med school, you're changing and looking for someone different, you meet some great doctors, and you're gone and we're apart. It's no one's fault, really. C'est la vie. Life goes on, as always. So what did our relationship really mean? Was it just a byproduct of circumstance, that we both happened to be at the "right" place, at the "right" time, so voila we "fell" in love? So what does commitment in love mean? Does it just mean "I will love you for the foreseeable future"; "till I don't like you, or you don't like me, or we don't like each other anymore"? Is that what it means?
Both NYT and Salon had articles on the trend of serial monogamy and how it reflects the rise of consumerism in modern times (damn I wish I had bookmarked them). The abundance of choice, the rise in our "purchasing power", increase in gender equality, and ubiquity of information - do they all contribute to a more cavalier, shopper's mentality toward love, relationships, and marriage? "If it doesn't fit, then find another one?" Since the traditional economic and social benefits of a committed relationship (including, but not exclusively marriage) are decreasing in importance today, why struggle through a marriage and try to make it work? Why not just separate and find someone else? Maybe you two were good for each other ten years ago. But now? Surely there is a better match for you, and him/her, out there today. Why, look at that young hunky coworker down the hall. Or that cute doubles partner at the tennis club. Or your girlfriend's newly single lawyer friend. Or all those guys on match.com...
We humans are such contradictory animals. On one hand, we crave the stability, the safety of knowing someone who will always love us, no matter what. Someone who's always there for us, who accepts us for who we are. Yet on the other hand, we are constantly changing, and so human relationships could never provide us this stability that we crave. Perhaps this is where some people turn to religion. If there is a God, then He will love me no matter what, right? He will never change and never abandon me, since He is by definition unchanging, right? That's not my answer though, unfortunately. So what is? The happiness of self? That strikes me as a bit narcissistic. So what else is left?
Tuesday, November 15, 2005
Thinking too little
Wednesday, November 09, 2005
Random ramblings
I benched 165 tonight. Whoo! I guess Men's Health is not full of ish after all, the subscription is finally paying off. My stretch goal was to hit 180 this year...but damn I'm still not gaining any weight! I keep getting stronger, but just not putting on any mass; hell I'm getting leaner. Doesn't that defeat the whole purpose of working out? I mean, when a girl checks you out, it's all about size right? It's not like she can tell visually, "Oh gosh, he's so strong". Instead, she'll be like, "Oh gosh, he's so big". Size, definitely matters.
*********
Did anyone catch the live West Wing debate this week? Wow that was pretty awesome. If only we could have candidates capable of carrying on debates w/ real content like that, instead of platitudes and soundbites. W probably needed Karl to pause the DVR and explain everything to him anyways. I have to say, Allan Alda was really convincing as a Republican. I thought he argued the free market philosophy really well, and the entrepreneur in me tend to agree. Even though I'm definitely liberal and won't vote Republican because of their social agenda, I have to say when spun well, their policies can certainly sound convincing to the laymen.
**********
Work fucking blew today. It's one of those days that makes you understand why competitors like Google and Yahoo can totally run around and kick our ass . There are more endemic problems than "they release faster" or "they are media darlings now". No, the way our management thinks confounds me sometimes. I suppose it's a lesson in corporate life; I hope to remember this if I become CEO someday.
*********
Did anyone catch the live West Wing debate this week? Wow that was pretty awesome. If only we could have candidates capable of carrying on debates w/ real content like that, instead of platitudes and soundbites. W probably needed Karl to pause the DVR and explain everything to him anyways. I have to say, Allan Alda was really convincing as a Republican. I thought he argued the free market philosophy really well, and the entrepreneur in me tend to agree. Even though I'm definitely liberal and won't vote Republican because of their social agenda, I have to say when spun well, their policies can certainly sound convincing to the laymen.
**********
Work fucking blew today. It's one of those days that makes you understand why competitors like Google and Yahoo can totally run around and kick our ass . There are more endemic problems than "they release faster" or "they are media darlings now". No, the way our management thinks confounds me sometimes. I suppose it's a lesson in corporate life; I hope to remember this if I become CEO someday.
Thursday, October 13, 2005
I accidentally stumbled upon this guy's writing recently online, and have been devouring it in the few hours of downtime I have. It's really, really moving. I suppose one of the marks of good fiction is the ability to resonate with our lives, our experiences. They are our dreams, our nightmares, our reflections, our projections.
I don't understand life sometimes. I wish I had more answers and fewer questions.
*****************
什麼是戀愛？就是相戀的兩人都有相同的美好回憶。回憶存在於兩人不必言傳的老地方，琅琅上口的電影對白，一首老歌，一份熟悉的菜單。
站在老地方，你會被發黃的空氣包圍，你的胸口沉悶，透不過氣。
聽到電影對白，你會回到那個初次約會的電影院，你不會記得電影好不好看，但你永遠記得身邊女孩的發香。
逛街時聽到曾經的老歌，你會在試衣間里，抹去不知道從哪里生出的眼淚。
***********
我有感而發，說：“一個人的一生，就像一張地圖，有人的地圖大些，有人的地圖小點，地圖上標示著這個人去過什麼地方，走過哪些路，呼吸過哪里的空氣，在哪里跟什麼樣的人，一起走過什麼樣的道路。” 子晴沒有說話，只是撥弄著臭豆腐上的泡菜。
“有些人的人生地圖很遼闊，他們的足跡遍佈世界各地，他們的地圖有巴黎鐵塔旁的落日、有萊茵河畔的日出，或許還有絲路上的燥風、一望無際的太平洋，這些人很幸福，他們與世界共同生活著。”我繼續說著，這些話都是我日日夜夜，想同子晴說的心里話。
“也有些人，像我奶奶，他們的人生地圖就在小小的廚房里、在家里小小的客廳里、在兒女上下學的路途里。他們的世界很小，但他們也有幸福的方式，他們跟家庭一起生活著。”我說，鼻子酸酸的。
“而我的人生地圖，很小很小，除了實驗室，我的人生地圖都是跟你在一起的記憶，好多好多的老地方，以前我們常常在新興路上的租屋煮火鍋、下棋、拼圖，那段時光真的很棒，還記得我們說總有一天要把它給買下來，沒想到隔年它就被拆掉了。”我勉強笑說：“但那張3000片的拼圖還沒拼完呢。”
我真摯地說：“我人生最美好的時間，都在你身上，謝謝你，陪我畫出這麼動人的地圖。”
***********
“永恆的愛情，只有在有限的生命里才能呼吸，永恆的生命卻培養不了永恆的愛情。”
I don't understand life sometimes. I wish I had more answers and fewer questions.
*****************
什麼是戀愛？就是相戀的兩人都有相同的美好回憶。回憶存在於兩人不必言傳的老地方，琅琅上口的電影對白，一首老歌，一份熟悉的菜單。
站在老地方，你會被發黃的空氣包圍，你的胸口沉悶，透不過氣。
聽到電影對白，你會回到那個初次約會的電影院，你不會記得電影好不好看，但你永遠記得身邊女孩的發香。
逛街時聽到曾經的老歌，你會在試衣間里，抹去不知道從哪里生出的眼淚。
***********
我有感而發，說：“一個人的一生，就像一張地圖，有人的地圖大些，有人的地圖小點，地圖上標示著這個人去過什麼地方，走過哪些路，呼吸過哪里的空氣，在哪里跟什麼樣的人，一起走過什麼樣的道路。” 子晴沒有說話，只是撥弄著臭豆腐上的泡菜。
“有些人的人生地圖很遼闊，他們的足跡遍佈世界各地，他們的地圖有巴黎鐵塔旁的落日、有萊茵河畔的日出，或許還有絲路上的燥風、一望無際的太平洋，這些人很幸福，他們與世界共同生活著。”我繼續說著，這些話都是我日日夜夜，想同子晴說的心里話。
“也有些人，像我奶奶，他們的人生地圖就在小小的廚房里、在家里小小的客廳里、在兒女上下學的路途里。他們的世界很小，但他們也有幸福的方式，他們跟家庭一起生活著。”我說，鼻子酸酸的。
“而我的人生地圖，很小很小，除了實驗室，我的人生地圖都是跟你在一起的記憶，好多好多的老地方，以前我們常常在新興路上的租屋煮火鍋、下棋、拼圖，那段時光真的很棒，還記得我們說總有一天要把它給買下來，沒想到隔年它就被拆掉了。”我勉強笑說：“但那張3000片的拼圖還沒拼完呢。”
我真摯地說：“我人生最美好的時間，都在你身上，謝謝你，陪我畫出這麼動人的地圖。”
***********
“永恆的愛情，只有在有限的生命里才能呼吸，永恆的生命卻培養不了永恆的愛情。”
Sunday, October 02, 2005
Interesting reading
Unfortunately, my to-read list of tech blogs and articles is growing much faster than I can consume. Now thanks to Findory I think it's finally going to completely overwhelm me. Here's my little experiment at building a repository of some thought-provoking, influential writings from the tech community that I've come across lately.
(OK, I confess - it's also archiving for myself in case my laptop dies).
The Long Tail
Web 2.0
AJAX
Adam Bosworth on Web Services
August 2009: How Google beat Amazon and Ebay to the Semantic Web
In this world, the API is the URL
I hope to keep growing this list. If you have any suggestions please chime in!
(OK, I confess - it's also archiving for myself in case my laptop dies).
The Long Tail
Web 2.0
AJAX
Adam Bosworth on Web Services
August 2009: How Google beat Amazon and Ebay to the Semantic Web
In this world, the API is the URL
I hope to keep growing this list. If you have any suggestions please chime in!
Friday, September 30, 2005
I hate moving
I hate, hate, HATE moving. I am so sick of packing, moving, and unpacking my life every single year, sometimes multiple times a year since '98, and now I have to move again. I hate looking for a place to live - it's such a timesink, especially when you're working full-time. It's stressful, exhausting, expensive and not to mention a big waste of time. I'm throwing and giving stuff away left and right just so I don't have to pack and move them, it's that bad.
there's got to be a way to make this system more better. Can we create some sort of web service that acts as a clearinghouse for all landlords and tenants? Like housingmaps.com, but more sophisticated. Better filters, automatic synching so ads are never out of date. Maybe a bidding system to match highest bidder/seller like ebay. Link it to credit bureau backends to automatically run credit checks, so I don't have to fill out so much goddamn paperwork. Publicly visible calendars (like outlook s+ for easy appt scheduling, no more of this phone tag crap). Mine the phone/IM conversations for data and post it into an FAQ to avoid repeat conversations. Overlay prices, upcoming openings, and etc. all onto the same map. Hell SMS me when I drive by an open apt in areas I designate I like goddamnit...ok, I know you can't throw technology at every problem, but this seriously sucks. This system is so inefficient, so antiquated. there's gotta be a better way.
there's got to be a way to make this system more better. Can we create some sort of web service that acts as a clearinghouse for all landlords and tenants? Like housingmaps.com, but more sophisticated. Better filters, automatic synching so ads are never out of date. Maybe a bidding system to match highest bidder/seller like ebay. Link it to credit bureau backends to automatically run credit checks, so I don't have to fill out so much goddamn paperwork. Publicly visible calendars (like outlook s+ for easy appt scheduling, no more of this phone tag crap). Mine the phone/IM conversations for data and post it into an FAQ to avoid repeat conversations. Overlay prices, upcoming openings, and etc. all onto the same map. Hell SMS me when I drive by an open apt in areas I designate I like goddamnit...ok, I know you can't throw technology at every problem, but this seriously sucks. This system is so inefficient, so antiquated. there's gotta be a better way.
Sunday, September 25, 2005
Is RSS the new TV?
So I've been thinking, is RSS the new TV? RSS seems to be rapidly emerging as the de facto technology used for distributing and retrieving content in today's web. While thus far much of it has been restricted to blogosphere, I think the implications can reach much further. I think a couple of characteristics makes RSS extremely compelling
1. It's similar to TV in that both are "push model" technologies. However, RSS is different that my desired content is "pushed out" in the background while I do other activities, and I'm free to consume this content on my own time. This is rather different than search or browsing's "pull model" where I have to actively seek and fetch the content I desire. It's not unlike TiVo where I can consume content "on-demand"
At the same time, I have much more discretion over the content source. I only subscribe to sources I want when I want, and I get much more non-establishment, grassroot information. Granted the signal-to-noise ratio is worse, but there's a lot of garbage on TV too.
I would not be surprised if the next generation aggregator built in intelligence (pattern matching, collaborative filtering) that automatically identified new content (feeds) based on what you are currently consuming. Think Amazon recommendations/MySpace + RSS, or maybe even Yahoo 360-like hey your friends are reading/listening/watching this feed, don't you want to watch this too? Now throw an Adsense contextual advertising model on top of that. Yes contextual ads are already being placed in RSS, no big deal. But if it's also combined w/ the context of your other activities, such as your search history, your peripheral devices & their capabilities, what you have on the sidebar, etc., the advertisement could be much more powerful. There is a compelling scenario of how Google and Tivo can combine to use your search context can deliver to super-pinpointed and compelling product ads/offers, which is very interesting. I don't see what you couldn't do the same w/ RSS.
Now text content by itself isn't all that, doesn't nearly compare to the entertainment value of TV. But w/ RSS 2.0 and enclosures, it could be much more interesting
2. Enclosures basically allow you to enclose ("attach") any sort of media w/ RSS, be it photos, video, music, etc. Winer describes how RSS enclosures can easily be used to deliver video content. So now you can get your favorite Pirillo podcasts, Daily Show from comedy central, and your best friends awesome pics from her last Europe trip, any time, any where you want, all via RSS. And you can respond via comments and publish your own content (again, using RSS), which makes the interaction two-way and much better than TV. If I can do all of this at my own control, would I still even want TV in its traditional timed, one-way model? Especially if advertisers get better returns based on the new model due to contextual history from other sources? I would think the studio, advertisers, and customers can all win out on this. Yes, certain content like sports will still be difficult to distribute, but for most other content I hardly even bother w/ TV anymore. Especially news. Maybe it'll be a powerful supplement to TV
3. Now imagine if you can take all of this RSS goodness on the go with a myriad of peripheral devices, hmm, would it get more interesting? Let's find out...
On a related note, since Google's rolling out national WiFi, there's been much speculation of their strategy. If I were Google I would offer free access to consumer in exchange for their activity context while online (search history, browsing, the whole shebang), then combine that w/ Local search and Adsense to deliver some real-time, location specific ads/product offers. That'd be pretty cool. Privacy is an issue, but I think a good number of users will feel most of the time privacy is a small price to pay for free access, myself included. There should of course be an option to opt out while I'm doing personal acitivies like online banking or whatever, but that's a minority of the time to me. Advertising based access has been tried before, w/ Netzero and all, but it's possible Google will be more successful at it thanks to their search expertise.
*********
So I have to admit, I did go to the fountain and drink some Kool-Aid at the company meeting. Forget the speeches, all the VPs sound the same after a while. But actually seeing the product demos? That was pretty fucking cool. Outlook + RSS + Sharepoint? Sweet. Xbox 360? Makes me drool. Start.com + Sidebar + Sidehow? That's got hella potential (plus it's my team!). IPTV? new Hotmail? Sure there were plenty other things that blew, but not everything was a me-too product. There were some cool stuff. Our management may suck, but down in the trenches some of us peons are still making interesting stuff. That instills some hope. Though the miniscule dividend was disappointing; that means the stock price isn't going anywhere for a while, oh well...
*********
Wow, has anyone noticed RedHerring's back? I sure didn't know. When they shut down that was like the end of an era. I'm glad to see them back.
1. It's similar to TV in that both are "push model" technologies. However, RSS is different that my desired content is "pushed out" in the background while I do other activities, and I'm free to consume this content on my own time. This is rather different than search or browsing's "pull model" where I have to actively seek and fetch the content I desire. It's not unlike TiVo where I can consume content "on-demand"
At the same time, I have much more discretion over the content source. I only subscribe to sources I want when I want, and I get much more non-establishment, grassroot information. Granted the signal-to-noise ratio is worse, but there's a lot of garbage on TV too.
I would not be surprised if the next generation aggregator built in intelligence (pattern matching, collaborative filtering) that automatically identified new content (feeds) based on what you are currently consuming. Think Amazon recommendations/MySpace + RSS, or maybe even Yahoo 360-like hey your friends are reading/listening/watching this feed, don't you want to watch this too? Now throw an Adsense contextual advertising model on top of that. Yes contextual ads are already being placed in RSS, no big deal. But if it's also combined w/ the context of your other activities, such as your search history, your peripheral devices & their capabilities, what you have on the sidebar, etc., the advertisement could be much more powerful. There is a compelling scenario of how Google and Tivo can combine to use your search context can deliver to super-pinpointed and compelling product ads/offers, which is very interesting. I don't see what you couldn't do the same w/ RSS.
Now text content by itself isn't all that, doesn't nearly compare to the entertainment value of TV. But w/ RSS 2.0 and enclosures, it could be much more interesting
2. Enclosures basically allow you to enclose ("attach") any sort of media w/ RSS, be it photos, video, music, etc. Winer describes how RSS enclosures can easily be used to deliver video content. So now you can get your favorite Pirillo podcasts, Daily Show from comedy central, and your best friends awesome pics from her last Europe trip, any time, any where you want, all via RSS. And you can respond via comments and publish your own content (again, using RSS), which makes the interaction two-way and much better than TV. If I can do all of this at my own control, would I still even want TV in its traditional timed, one-way model? Especially if advertisers get better returns based on the new model due to contextual history from other sources? I would think the studio, advertisers, and customers can all win out on this. Yes, certain content like sports will still be difficult to distribute, but for most other content I hardly even bother w/ TV anymore. Especially news. Maybe it'll be a powerful supplement to TV
3. Now imagine if you can take all of this RSS goodness on the go with a myriad of peripheral devices, hmm, would it get more interesting? Let's find out...
On a related note, since Google's rolling out national WiFi, there's been much speculation of their strategy. If I were Google I would offer free access to consumer in exchange for their activity context while online (search history, browsing, the whole shebang), then combine that w/ Local search and Adsense to deliver some real-time, location specific ads/product offers. That'd be pretty cool. Privacy is an issue, but I think a good number of users will feel most of the time privacy is a small price to pay for free access, myself included. There should of course be an option to opt out while I'm doing personal acitivies like online banking or whatever, but that's a minority of the time to me. Advertising based access has been tried before, w/ Netzero and all, but it's possible Google will be more successful at it thanks to their search expertise.
*********
So I have to admit, I did go to the fountain and drink some Kool-Aid at the company meeting. Forget the speeches, all the VPs sound the same after a while. But actually seeing the product demos? That was pretty fucking cool. Outlook + RSS + Sharepoint? Sweet. Xbox 360? Makes me drool. Start.com + Sidebar + Sidehow? That's got hella potential (plus it's my team!). IPTV? new Hotmail? Sure there were plenty other things that blew, but not everything was a me-too product. There were some cool stuff. Our management may suck, but down in the trenches some of us peons are still making interesting stuff. That instills some hope. Though the miniscule dividend was disappointing; that means the stock price isn't going anywhere for a while, oh well...
*********
Wow, has anyone noticed RedHerring's back? I sure didn't know. When they shut down that was like the end of an era. I'm glad to see them back.
Thursday, September 22, 2005
Aargggh
WTF? blogger, xanga, and MSN spaces all don't allow users to view the raw RSS feed generated by their respective blogs, what the hell is up w/ that? I need to look at some raw RSS feeds for my project and this is stupid and frustrating. I can't even tell whether blogger is using atom, RSS 2.0, or what. There must be a way to grab the raw xml, I'm just not seeing it right now. AARRGGHHH!
Tuesday, September 20, 2005
At least they're not complete bozos
After the big re-org and watching the company meeting webcast, I guess my first impression is that I'm glad our top management isn't quite as out of touch as they sound to the outside world, though that's not saying much. I thought Ballmer came across horribly in last week's Business week interview, completely in denial, dodging tough questions without giving any substantial answers, and simply being a rah-rah cheerleader. And internally both Gates and Ballmer have came across as completely being out of touch, not truly seeing Google (and Apple and Yahoo) as worthy competitors, and ignoring valid employee complaints about overladen process, bureaucracy, lack of innovation, etc.
At least they are now seeing Google as a worthy competitor, because they absolutely are. I'm glad they finally acknowledged Google's "web as a platform" strategy (not that it's hard, everyone and their grandmothers can probably see it by now), w/ their maps API, gmail, storage, personalized search & content, etc. I have my doubts as to whether this MSN and Windows marriage is going to counter that strategy effectively, given their drastically different cultures, but at least they are finally addressing this threat. Furthermore, they keep speaking of this amazing "innovation pipeline", but I'll believe it when I start to see real products that make me go, "man that's (bleep)ing cool (bleep)."
I still think Google has the edge though, they are what msft used to be 15-20 years ago: young, smart, arrogant, and hard-working as all hell. It's no wonder the msft offer acceptance rate at Stanford is ~50%, hell I'm surprised it's even that high. I do think it's an interesting case study whether msft can avoid the fate of IBM, HP, Merck, and other successful tech companies who became victims of their own success as they grew big and old. But I'm not sure I personally want to be part of this experiment. There are still execs whom I respect tremendously here, particularly Chris Jones in Windows, Steve Sinofsky in Office, and J Allard in Xbox, but whether/when this 2nd generation leadership will really get to call the shots at msft still remains to be seen. btw, Steve's got an excellent post on becoming a general manager that I just have to point out.
So in summary, it's "I'm glad they (Bill and Steve) are not complete morons." But they'll have to show me a lot more to convince me they are worthy of the god-status bestowed upon them around here.
At least they are now seeing Google as a worthy competitor, because they absolutely are. I'm glad they finally acknowledged Google's "web as a platform" strategy (not that it's hard, everyone and their grandmothers can probably see it by now), w/ their maps API, gmail, storage, personalized search & content, etc. I have my doubts as to whether this MSN and Windows marriage is going to counter that strategy effectively, given their drastically different cultures, but at least they are finally addressing this threat. Furthermore, they keep speaking of this amazing "innovation pipeline", but I'll believe it when I start to see real products that make me go, "man that's (bleep)ing cool (bleep)."
I still think Google has the edge though, they are what msft used to be 15-20 years ago: young, smart, arrogant, and hard-working as all hell. It's no wonder the msft offer acceptance rate at Stanford is ~50%, hell I'm surprised it's even that high. I do think it's an interesting case study whether msft can avoid the fate of IBM, HP, Merck, and other successful tech companies who became victims of their own success as they grew big and old. But I'm not sure I personally want to be part of this experiment. There are still execs whom I respect tremendously here, particularly Chris Jones in Windows, Steve Sinofsky in Office, and J Allard in Xbox, but whether/when this 2nd generation leadership will really get to call the shots at msft still remains to be seen. btw, Steve's got an excellent post on becoming a general manager that I just have to point out.
So in summary, it's "I'm glad they (Bill and Steve) are not complete morons." But they'll have to show me a lot more to convince me they are worthy of the god-status bestowed upon them around here.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)