dkellam

This post will NOT appear on my blog. That said, no more posts will appear on LJ either :P
My LJ posts are automatically posted by Wordpress. This hack doesn't update posts, so when I significantly changed my latest blog post, LJ kept the old version. This is happening to an annoying degree, so I hereby decree, my loyal subjects^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hreaders, thee to join the post-teen world of blogs and RSS feeds.

Vale LJ!

I wish I knew more about Psychology... then I'd be able to explain why this site is currently sitting on ~90% accuracy. It's only got one guess wrong - it thought I was over 50. That probably isn't too far from the truth, thought pattern-wise

Kevin's post (and the links therein) is most timely. John and I were today discussing our strategic approach for Consolid8 (the codename keeps changing) in light of the recent Leopard announcements. Mail is broken and still will be from the looks of things. We're going to fix it. Anyway, back to the subject of Kevin's post - .Mac



Aside from the usual stuff about Apple "not getting it" and the silo mentality evident therein (i.e. the fact that certain apps 'get it' and others don't; certain apps have acceptable UIs and others don't, etc.), Apple could take a leaf out of Google's book that most people don't focus on. Google isn't (solely) about new-fangled management techniques which only work given their cultural context (so don't try to copy them), dictatorial benevolence and providing a bunch of free shit. Google, whilst being a 'new media' company (or is that 'nu media'? I'm not hip with it), is relying on elementary economics, specifically the cross-price elasticity of demand



In Google's case, the "good" is advertising. Its complements are many. I read it elsewhere first, but this quote puts it nicely:

Innovation in complements lies at the heart of Google's strategy. Because Google makes its money by selling internet advertising, anything that promotes people's use of the internet - from software applications to online auctions to telephone service - is simply a complement to its ad business. It's in Google's interest, therefore, to develop and give away as many of those products as possible, or at least to keep their prices low...

From The Sydney Morning Herald (Fairfax).



Apple is doing a fantastic job creating complements for their hardware; it's what they've always done best. Historically, the Mac OS can be seen as a complement for Apple hardware. Sure, you could run BeOS or YellowDogLinux instead, but the value proposition reall ychanged when you threw in the Mac OS. You got a whole lot of stuff, seemingly for NOTHING. For some users, the price really was zero, but for others it was the Mac hardware premium they weren't otherwise willing to pay. Recently, they've been doing it with their iApps. You used to buy a Mac with NOTHING installed on it except a shitty incompatible word processor (AppleWorks - sorry John, anything that didn't speak .doc was useless even back then) and some trialware. Now, you buy a Mac and the ONLY thing you need to add to it is Microsoft Office (or OpenOffice if you can put up with X11 or Java) and optionally a bunch of free software from versiontracker. Now you have iEverything. Heck, thanks to Bootcamp, Windows XP is now a complement for Apple hardware!



Sadly, it seems Apple doesn't quite get this. Perhaps they're caught up in all their iPod success and figure "we can start charging people for everything again! The world LOVES US MUWAHAHAHAHhahha..." (runs all the way to the bank). Now they're charging people for iLife and iWork and soon iThis and iThat (iThis goes with iThat at iSusan?). There's nothing wrong with charging for your complements... except when people aren't willing to pay for them, as is evident with .Mac, and where the increase in demand for your main product more than offsets the loss in revenue from making your complement free. I think .Mac and most likely iLife itself are prime contenders here.



So complements need not be free, but when you have a choice between keeping 3.5 million (at 2002 levels) iTools users or extorting US$99 subscription fees from 1 million complaining Mac users (2006 levels), perhaps it's time for their business model to change. Think about any other organisation on the planet and what they would pay for even a statistically significant percentage of their client base to advertise their company in every single e-mail message they send. That @mac.com is significantly undervalued by Apple.



In any case, Apple could easily justify forgoing US$100M in revenues each year just based on the lock-in effects of providing @mac.com e-mail addresses for all their users. At least until Consolid8 is launched



N.B. Bootcamp also solves another of Apple's market share problems: fear. But that's a topic for another day.



N.B. This argument is a lot more tenuous if you accept that Apple is becoming a software company, in which case you'd argue that the Mac hardware lock-in (Intel chips haven't changed that... yet) is simply acts as a mandatory complement for Mac OS X. The biggest problem with this approach is that it's a juggling act between too little and too much functionality in the "included Apps". Coupled with the evidently low conversion rates between bundled and premium (i.e. iLife, .Mac) software and the low unit price of such software anyway (i.e. in contrast to the "Pro" apps - FCP, Aperture, etc), Apple should make these products free and let the complements (sic) speak for themselves.

Just read Christopher Hawkins' post on One-Stop tech shops and had to comment. I think he's mainly right - there's a serious argument (backed by economic theory and history) for specialisation. There's also serious contemporary practice for it as companies are divesting their non-core assets and concentrating on what they do best. In a society increasingly intolerant of bullshit (e.g. conventional advertising), excellence in your area is mandatory. Specialisation and focus are the methods.



That said, at the smaller end of town search and transaction costs are significant and change the game.

Waterfront IT touts itself as an IT Consulting company. This is not an accident, nor is it misleading given most of our work is in the 'support' department. We are aiming to act as a one-stop IT shop for small companies, just as Christopher claims is inefficient. But, if you look at it another way, we are a specialist IT Consulting company for small non-IT-savvy businesses. We just happen to in-source (the make component of the make-or-buy decision) certain functions as a convenience for our clients. I'm sure our web hosting service isn't (technically) as good as ICO's, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't do it. In fact, there is no tangible difference between a $30 Waterfront IT plan and a $500 ICO plan for someone who just wants a basic "contact me" website and e-mail hosting. In fact, when operating as Consultants (and billing by the hour), the search costs associated with finding another appropriate vendor, negotiating with them, setting it up, liaising with the clients, etc. are significant. We do it, but only after we've made an assessment that it's worth it (to the client).



I started Waterfront IT with the goal of having no inventory, billing close to 100% of my time (it's a part-time business, so this is more attainable) to clients and not expanding beyond about $50,000/yr in income. There are plenty of good reasons for this: efficiency of billing keeps rates down for clients & profit up for the business; no inventory reduces costs; artificially low capacity allows you to be more selective about clients &/or increase your rate when your capacity is being reached; not focussing (and hence incurring opportunity cost) on internal systems development and business expansion, thus leaving more time for my other businesses and not diluting my focus. I do the work for the client, go home and don't have to think about it. Not so.



I/Waterfront IT now:

• Has its own testing, internal & production hosting servers



• Is accumulating inventory (networking equipment, optical & magnetic drives, anti-virus software (Trend Micro PC-Cillin), etc.



• Has its own Accusys 76510 backup unit stuffed with 3 x 320GB SATA II hard drives for testing (for a push into small business backup solutions)



• Is a company, with MYOB Accounting Plus and MYOB PocketAccounts for billing (increasing complexity/time but improving financial reporting and accuracy)



• Spends considerable time on quotations (even though we have a no free quotes philosophy



• Involved in business negotiations with several entities for part/deferred payment deals (thus increasing up-front costs/decreasing up-front revenues for the possibility of future risk-adjusted income



• Spends considerable time in the car. Now with operating closer to the production possibilities frontier this represents a problem - time spent in the car is compensated at somewhere between $0 and $40 (minus car costs, which economically eat up almost all of that), whereas on-site time is compensated closer to $100.



• Investing in marketing systems



• About to invest in additional casual staff to cover booking timetabling inefficiences (multiple appointments at once), risk reduction (multiple appointments of variable duration close to each other), service enhancement (holidays, unavailability, busy-ness), timeliness (quicker turnaround time due to task decentralisation)

And more.



These efforts can be broken into two goals: service enhancement and business improvement. My initial goal of an asset-poor consulting approach turned out not to be very realistic for smaller clients. It's easier for me and cheaper for clients to set up a hosting server and offer people e-mail for $100/year than to set up a separate (and possibly different) hosting account for each client. By doing it myself, I also have full control over what goes on, so when a client is on BigPond ADSL and suddenly finds outgoing port 25 connections blocked on the border network, I simply set up my server to also work on port 1025 (which isn't blocked). This flexibility allows me to deliver better service at a better cost, even though it's not my primary business nor an area I'm actively pursuing. In economic terms, hosting is a saturated market, where the expected (market-based) economic profit hovers around 0. Not so in this instance, where the economic microsystem of client-->consultant-->service provider is so inefficient that backwards integrating many of their functions makes sense.



For instance, I now stock Anti-Virus software. Partly because I get volume discounts (but I'd rather not, as cashflow is more important to me: not having my cash tied up in inventory) but mainly because it's more convenient for the client. I can be on-site and know that if I need it, I can install anti-virus without having to:

• use a trial or NFR serial number (which needs to be changed later, assuming that is even possible)



• ringing my supplier and ordering a serial number (which admittedly is a great service, but there's still a 15-minute wait period assuming they're contactable



• go to a store and purchase a physical boxed copy



• download the software and deal with credit cards on a potentially dangerously infected PC

There are issues with stocking it:

• I have to carry it around (or open up each container and note down the serial number and keep that up-to-date



• I am incentivised to sell Trend Micro, rather than any other solution (by virtue of the above efficiencies and the desire to turnover stock)

The second is my main concern. I happen to be satisfied with Trend Micro, above and beyond NOD32, MacAfee, VET, Avast/Antivir and particular Norton. It has excellent anti-virus, OK spyware (I use Spybot anyway) and a customer-friendly firewall. So in 90% of situations, I'll recommend it. That makes it worth stocking and also unbiased and good value to the client, but the product analysis is not necessarily correct for other products (e.g. wireless routers).



Some equipment, such as the Accusys backup unit, has been purchased to improve knowledge on how things work and to be able to adequately test it in a non-live environment. So I have to wear the cost for that, but it should be paid back pretty quickly on the next backup job. It could be argued this creates an incentive to sell that product. True, but there's more to it than that. It enhances my knowledge of a particular product, thus decreasing the cost (search costs) of implementing that product in the future. I can and do still recommend different solutions, but these require the consulting approach (requirements --> analysis --> design/implementation/testing/maintenance, etc.) which costs relatively more. So, if I follow my approach of only internalising products & services I would recommend anyway and ensuring I still provide impartial advice, there is no harm done and in fact the client receives better service at a lower cost.



Yes, there are apparent inefficiencies in the above approach. The time and $ I spend on internal systems/testing these products should be captured in future jobs either through charging the same as if I had to investigate from scratch every time or increasing my hourly rate. I tend to go for the latter, but this is difficult to achieve in the early stages. My rate has increased from $50/hr when I was still working casually for $10/hr in the computer shop, to $100/hr when the opportunity cost on my time is probably $40-50/hr for doing something similar. So relatively I'm not doing as well (%age-wise), but I've also hit the price points of the competition. So how do I stand out from them? Word of mouth. So far, my rates are lower than I would like (particularly for consulting/architectural design), but the goodwill and word-of-mouth is necessary to create both the demand and reputation to enable me to charge more. I also need to differentiate my services along more economic grounds - market rates for support (e.g. removing viruses) just don't leave that much room for leeway or leverage. Economic value is higher for networking, Infrastructure setup, data recovery, systems integration, custom development, etc. so rates can be higher. The trouble is convincing people of that. I see three ways:

1. Switch to providing fixed price quotes (where efficiency results in higher effective hourly rates)



2. Wait for word-of-mouth referral and demand to catch up



3. Using viral marketing, blogs, etc.

I guess this post is an instance of the third



Feel free to comment with further suggestions for improvement of the above!

This is how job applications should be. I can show you that one. I can't show you the applications I received for this position, but suffice it to say most came nowhere near Guy's second version, let alone his first.



I did lament this fact to a few people, but quickly realised I should not try to 'help' applicants who don't bother (or are unable) to proof-read their applications. Doing so may get them past the first round (The Great Resume Cull), but then they'd simply fail in the interview. So it's probably better that they quit whilst ahead. Don't proof-read. Don't tailor your application to the position. Just SPAM every available position that has some tangential relevance to whatever you think the world owes you as a career. Of course, they may have more luck with an HR drone than a small business owner/operator (and budding entrepreneur), particularly when you introduce political reasons for hiring (as opposed to straight 'Can they do the job?' issues).



I did receive one e-mail from an evidently competent person (those who know me realise I am more than quick to use the word 'incompetent' on nearly anyone, so take this as something of a big deal) who termed it an "absolute classic". I was surprised, because I distinctly remember taking out the geek humour (such as requiring applicants to provide the answer to the Ultimate Question - you know, Life, The Universe and Everything) due to character restrictions. Anyway, this guy is busy (understandably - competent people are a) hard to find and b) self-motivated to succeed and hence --> busy), but I do have his CV on hand. I'll just have to remember to keep it in a separate pile to the 'wood-yu-laikto-outsorcedat?' applications. i.e. OUT of my Junk Mail box.



Anyway, I'm currently debating whether to:

a) start a few more blogs and separate by content (www.lifewithmediocrity.com for whinges, blog.hiveservices.com for management & keeping www.drkellam.com for personal stuff)

b) the above, with a metablog containing all posts, categories determine sub-blogs

c) keep ranting & raving here on anything that grabs my fancy

d) all of the above

e) none of the above

f) some of the above

g) logically incongruent sequence of above

h) all of the above excluding the 'x of the above' questions

i) all of the above INcluding the 'x of the above' questions

[mandatory multi-guess formatting applied]

Homework for Strategic Cost Management this week is (partly) The Lemonade Game! w00t!

I finally got around to fixing my C610's wandering cursor problem. Without having to break anything in the process. thanks to these (brief) instructions and these more detailed ones.



Now I just have to convince Windows 2000 it's still itself and doesn't really need to reinstall all those drivers...



DRK

http://www.apple.com/getamac/drivers.html



they REALLY need to advise to look for "mac compatability", at least (or particularly) on printers.



Even most mac-compatible printers I've worked with had something fucked up about their driver. e.g. My current Brother setup utility will only detect the printer when only one network interface is present.

Some MFD devices work fine as printers, but not scanners. Lexmark are terrible offenders - even when they do work on OS X, it's usually thanks to some bug-ridden driver supplied by the manufacturer's website (because nobody in their right mind would use the one supplied on CD!)



Their other reasons (on the RHS) are valid, but I do wonder how many people, even Mac users, really use all that multimedia software. Maybe kids these days are being taught skills we weren't! Still, I bet I could outrun them in an Apple // typing speed contest... ah, the good old days

Well, it looks like Pandora's access policy has changed yet again. When I last posted, you got 10 hours free then had to pay & register with a US credit card/address. Then you needed to have a US IP Address (which I do ) to even listen beyond a few songs.



Now it's ad-supported! Fantastic! You just minimise the window and never see the ads. They also insert audio ads, but I've been listening for half an hour and haven't heard any yet. This is so much better than radio! (N.B. They still have a premium version with no ads).



If you're really keen, you can also grab the raw .mp3 files out of your Flash cache. They all have strange names of course, but you could always sort by date and correlate with your pandora playlist. Of course, if you're going to go to that much trouble to violate the terms of service, you might as well just use Limewire. But this way, Pandora does all the recommendations based on my somewhat limited knowledge of popular music and makes it easy for me to either listen to similar music again (through their service), or identical music if I take the time to scrounge my cache.



I'd pay if they actually let me...



DRK



P.S. Friends, ask me for proxy access if you need it . Ask hotmail if you need spare e-mail addresses

Alright, so everybody is into this 'web app' thing. How is it, really?

What need does it really solve?

(Open-ended questions)



Let's look at a few applications:

1. CRM

Example: SugarCRM (courtesy of myDataHub)

URL: demo.mydatahub.com.au

Technology:

• Web 1.0 (LAMP)



• Dedicated Server connected via Tier 1 peers in Australia (WebCentral)




Need solved: manage the sales process

Problem: Clients complain that it's too slow.

Solutions:

• AJAX-ify



• Run a traditional app (e.g. ACT! Database)

2. Email

Example: GMail

URL: gmail.com

Technology:

• Web 2.0 (AJAX)



• Truckloads of Google tech




Need solved: E-mail on the go.

Problems: (Debatable)

Solutions:

• Run a traditional app (e.g. ACT! Database)

OK taking SugarCRM vs Gmail, it's clear GMail is a much more responsive, usable app. So AJAXifying things is generally a good move, cross-browser issues, difficulty of programming and dial-up connection lag aside. But is AJAX enough? Are we just at another local maximum of the thin-vs-rich client function? I think so.



That brings me to...



Here are 10 reasons I hate Web Apps (even 2.0 ones):

1. Ubiquity - I'm not always online. Don't cut me off from my data when I'm not.



2. Compatability - I use at LEAST 3 different browsers and that's mainstream. Don't give me an app that doesn't at least work in Safari (See this one here? Pre-installed on MILLIONS OF PCs), Firefox and IE



3. Speed - Let's face it, you still wait for your data. You just do it less annoying places (e.g. forms with dynamic drop-down menus)



4. Installation - Installation on your own server is still complicated for the average person (I guess that's largely a linux complaint though)



5. Installing RubyOnRails - this one gets its own special place in Hell. Not easy. Not standard. Not documented.



6. JavaScript - there is a very warm place in Hell right next to Satan himself for this bastard of a language



7. Multiple Devices - you're lucky to have a modern web app support the main 3 browsers (as defined by accessibility, not market share), let alone mobile ones. Give me IMAP sync with my phone any day.
   
   
8. Mobile Access - unless you've known Ziggy for years, chances are you're still paying something like 2c/KB for your GPRS (slightly better than dial-up, maybe, sometimes, when it doesn't drop out or crawl to a halt). 2.2c? Bah, that's nothing, right? Wrong. If your home adsl cost that much, your 1GB of quota (assuming a basic AU$30-40/mth plan) would cost you in the order of TWENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS. Cue: Austin Powers.



9. DotComs - stop giving any damn kid an excuse to pocket millions just by adding "social", "web 2.0" and "paradigm" to his business plan



10. Interoperability - On a good day, I might use & update dotProject, 3 different blogs, 2 CRM installations, 3 wiki's and (locally) Excel, Word, MYOB, Adium (multi-protocol chat), OnTheJob (OS X), Mac Mail and Safari... just to keep track of tasks, links and projects. Note there is not a single social networking site on there. If there were, we'd be back in pre-Trillian days. Urgh. It looks like I, as a single individual, need enterprise-level software just to integrate the various functions of my life. And all this is supposed to make our lives easier. No wonder most of the above never get updated!!!

And to be fair...



3 Reasons I like web apps:

1. It is easier to use an application from multiple locations



2. It is easier to set up (kinda flawed though - I could pay a consultant to set up software my own PC and you'd have the same net ease of set-up from my perspective



3. There is no 3

My vote for best /. comment goes to:



http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=190600&cid=15680907



in response to the current pirate poll.

http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/06/20myspace.html



It reads, "Teen, mom sue MySpace for $30 million"



It should read "Teen: your mum needs the $30 million to spend on parenting classes"

0-2. Robbed I tell ya. Let's try getting it IN next game...

And courtesy of John:



Update: Images were originally posted to a protected directory. Oops.

SPECIAL LIVEJOURNAL ONLY UPDATE!!!

Hey folks, in case you couldn't tell, I only post to my blog, which due to some h@X0r@71n6 (or whatever), cross-posts to LJ.
Unfortunately it doesn't update.

So anyway, here you have it, the FIRST LJ-specific text in my journal/blog/rant/whateverness.

Hope you're all having fun

I was sent an e-mail today containing the phrase "over-regulating malevolent piece of shit" with reference to the recent IR legislation. It reminded me of former thinking. N.B. not "got me thinking". Au contraire, the following is a complete thoughtless rant that hopefully bears some resemblance to former engagement in thought



I've been thinking more about politics lately, not from an informed academically sound study perspective, but from a "I know what's wrong with this - it's simple" perspective. It's filled with mediocre and incompetent people. We live in a capitalistic society, yet the people making all the decisions are those with artificially deflated salaries. Talk about lack of incentive. They're only ever going to get people who are either mediocre or believe very strongly in a cause to fill positions in government, non-profits or academia. My argument is that it's more of the former; substantially.



So the problem with the structure we have for capitalism is that it's not capitalistic enough. I'd say the same about both the labour party and the liberal party - the liberal party ARENT LIBERAL ENOUGH. And likewise for the labour party. Labour, STOP PRETENDING YOU KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT ECONOMICS. You dont. Liberal, STOP PRETENDING YOU GIVE A CRAP ABOUT SOCIAL POLICY. YOU HAVENT A CLUE. Right, now we've got that settled, let the market (voters) decide which portfolio of assets (choice of party over time; balance of power, etc.) to invest in. This incumbent-favouring centralism is just a prime example of MEDIOCRITY. The incentives are all wrong.

Stand for something. Be different. Be confident.



I liken it to marketing. Read Seth Godin - very good. I figure there's 1% of products that are truly "worthy" of attention in any given market. Whatever. So what do the other 99% do? They engage in marketing, which is to say, they try to flog a dead horse. They rely on exclusive distribution (e.g. Coke, anything sold in a supermarket), consumer mindspace, etc. to get their message across. Then something that is INTRINSICALLY worth buying comes along: nudie juice. Cap'n Crunch Doughnuts. Whatever. They dont spend a DIME on advertising. The product is the advertising. Their fans raving about it is their advertising. In Godinspeak, they "sneeze". These products have huge profit margins, but smaller markets. Implication? You need to work harder to identify and exploit more market inefficiencies. Difficulty for a lazy golf-playing senior executive? High.



So the world is full of mediocre and incompetent people. So what do we as a populus do? We put them in charge. Likelihood of getting out of such a mess? NFL. Not frickin' likely.

Short version:

• Living in North Boring (3104)



• Waterfront IT is going slowly



• Just launched myDataHub (SugarCRM hosting, customisation & support)



• Working on HiveServices, an eBay/YellowPages hybrid service (obviously more to it than that)



• Over 2/3 of the way through my Masters now - doing Knowledge Management and Business Finances this semester



• Swimming ~5 days a week @ Uni (anyone want to join me? I need some friendly competition )

Long version? Nah, you can wait another 3 months

Well, it's kinda just hit me. On Monday night I promised I would join a friend in his attempts at Polyphasic Sleep. You can read about some others who have tried it here and here.



I initially heard about this almost simultaneously from Will and Ben a few weeks back. Thought it was an interesting idea, but not much more. The kind of thing Steve would do. Well, he doesn't seem interested, so maybe I can be tougher than he is at something hehehehe. Anyway, back to it.



I went to look at beds the other day. I went to 'Beds for Backs' in Kings Way, as I have a stuffed back (long story - I'll spare you). Decent beds for about $2K, with supports to keep your spine in the right position while you sleep. Latex ones for about $3.5K. Compare this with a normal queen for around $1K of similar quality. Hmmm... so stuff to think about. Then I got thinking that my back is actually pretty good during the day now, thanks to a drug cocktail and (somewhat) improved diet and exercise (or any of the above). So all that remains is sleeping. So solution = buy a decent bed.



Or maybe... just maybe solution = sleep less! I toyed with the idea of 2 x 4-hour sleep blocks. Perhaps I could achieve the same results but maintaining other potentially beneficial sleep phases. But scheduling that is a bitch. You essentially have to spread it 8 hours apart (sleep2.start - sleep1.end) or its irregular. And by definition that means losing a 4 hour chunk in your day. Doing more with daytime was a large reason behind leaving my full time job. So out with that one.

4 x 2 hours doesn't really help much more either. And that's assuming such systems even work. So, here it goes, I am now officially embarking on a 1,5,9 sleep schedule. My next sleep will be at 1:00am, for half an hour. I will then sleep for 30 minutes every 4 hours thereafter and blog my progress. I am meeting Will at 2am in the city. We shall keep each other accountable.



So what do I hope to get out of this?

• Eliminate Procrastination



• Fix my back



• Eliminate 'huge meals'



• Achieve heighten states of awareness and brain activity



• Personal Challenge

Eliminate Procrastination

I figure that a large part of procrastination is the 'tomorrow factor': Why do today what you can put off 'til tomorrow? Well, what if there is no tomorrow? I believe very strongly in motivating forces - agency & expectency theories; all that stuff. So what if I simply eliminate the ability to put things off until tomorrow; the ability to temporarily remove them from my conscience whilst I sleep? If I procrastinate on this schedule, I'll go nuts. That creates a disincentive to do it . Besides, with at least 8 hours a day of likely solitude, it will be much harder to fill those gaps with social interaction, shopping, errands, sending business e-mails, etc. when nobody will be around to respond.



In any case, I've found that my most productive days are those with rigid meetings/deadlines set at certain times, with time in between limited to a few hours at most. So having to sleep after every 3.5 hours of work should heighten this effect and 'force' greater adherence to goals. Trust me, it will work (at least for me) .



Fix my back

I can currently lie for a few hours without hurting my back at all, almost regardless of position. As my chiro said, '8 hours of lying down is going to be bad for your back no matter what'. I tried the mid-sleep walk (get up and stretch), but it didn't seem to help. So if sleep.maxtime=30, hopefully I won't have any problems... as long as sleep time is not filled with sitting at computer time, of which I already have too much! I'll have to do more midnight walks. It will be just like college!

(We needed blogs back then!)



Eliminate huge meals

Well, being awake more should facilate more meal times of less intensity. I should also be able to burn off 'dinner' more easily. A positive side-effect, I hope.



Be more alert (basically)

Others have reported increased awareness, energy and processing capacity. I've been feeling like a slug lately. I thought it was lack of decent food, and that is certainly a large part, but it's not the whole story. Neither is exercise. During times when I've largely fixed such things, alertness has still been temporary. Higher quality sleep and the eventual inability to awake from non-REM sleep should mean that sleep-induced grogginess should be eliminated. Let's see...



Personal Challenge

Nothing I'm doing is challenging at the moment. Business plans are mainly talk at the moment. Waterfront IT isn't and isn't intended to be an all-consuming passion. Uni is just an intellectual exercise. Physical exercise is just something to do. Socialising is a very 'now' thing. But what about the future? I believe this is the first step towards achieving in general; both intrinsically and at a meta level. i.e. The benefits of polyphasic sleep should help achieve in general, and the process of acclimatising to it should set my motivation, drive and ability to execute into gear as well.



Besides, I have to be stronger than Will

(And publically humiliate myself if I fail heheheh)



Well, that's it for now. Officially decided not to sleep monophasically as of Wednesday 15 Feb @ 11:32pm AEST. Time for some non-computer entertainment for the next hour prior to sleep #1.



DRK

Well, following up from Richard's post, here we go:



According to similarminds.com, I am:

messy, disorganized, social, tough, outgoing, rarely worries, self revealing, open, risk taker, likes the unknown, likes large parties, makes friends easily, likes to stand out, likes to make fun of people, reckless, optimistic, positive, strong, does not like to be alone, ambivalent about chaos, abstract, impractical, not good at saving money, fearless, trusting, thrill seeker, not rule conscious, enjoys leadership, strange, loves food, abstract, rarely irritated, anti-authority, attracted to the counter culture



The ones in italics I consider completely inaccurate. The rest are pretty good though

Happy New Year!



I hope everybody is enjoying that extra leap second!



DRK

Eek. 7 days since I last posted. Feels like yesterday. Must remember to be more productive with my days :S



So how are things looking heading into the new year? Looking to move out in Jan - have found a nice loft-style apartment in Kew. Hopefully it will suit (we haven't seen it yet). Running a slight cash deficit at the moment, so have picked up some part-time (18hrs/week) IT work @ Bio21. Am doing that for 6-8 weeks initially. Potential scope for more, if I need it. Somewhat flexibile. I had my first day today, and am already reminded of the pain of full-time work! Just sitting at a computer for most of the day reminded me how much I hate it! Still, I should stop doing it at night-time when I'm not being paid for it first, before I complain about the 'work' side



Have got a couple of projects lined up for Waterfront IT and MyDataHub.com. Am learning a lot about risk and the quoting process. Maybe I'll write something about my experiences next month, when we'll have hopefully implemented a fairly simple online contact database. Let's hope I don't get the cost wrong by an order of magnitude this time



New Year's Resolution? PRODUCTIVITY.



So on that note, I'm going to catch some 'productive' Zzzzz's



DRK