The Laughing Wolf

I have re-read the Constitution and no where does it say that the State is a nanny, and that the making of poor, ill-considered, or just flat out stupid choices is a thing to be avoided. If anything, there appears to be an undercurrent there that sometimes stupid choices are good in that allows foolishness to be identified and/or eliminated.

Our great experiment is founded on the idea that the people, bless their black flabby little hearts, have the capability to think for themselves, to educate themselves on issues and events, and to make rational and informed decisions on their own. No one to hold their hands, to guide them, to feel their pain, or anything else. They are to stand alone and proud, and make a choice.

That includes what they eat (the idiocy of the food lawsuits is the subject for another day), what they drink, and what they put in their bodies, period. No one else has the right to dictate to you what you do in this regard. They can give you information, make sure you are informed, and expect you to get up off your lazy duff and BE informed. If, after all of this, you still want to do something stupid, that is your right. Remember, however, that the choice and all of its costs are yours to bear, because no one else has to pay for your mistakes.

If you are foolish, stupid, or lazy enough to put drugs in you without knowing what they are, what they do, and how they do it, then quite frankly you deserve what happens to you. If you fall for the pitchman’s spiel and don’t have the willpower or the brains not to do so, well, that is your problem. If you are sick or die as a result, that is at best a matter between you and the maker of the product, it is not anyone else’s. Under current criminal and civil law, if someone knowingly makes and sells/distributes a harmful or defective product, you can take them to court.

The government is into regulation because since the late 1800s/early 1900s, it has seen you not so much as a Citizen but a revenue producing unit. Harm to such is to be avoided, and though this is against every fundamental precept of the founding fathers, it continues to expand. It is time to stop that expansion.

Quite frankly, the right to make stupid decisions is good for many reasons, including improvement of the species. Not just in Darwinian terms, but in forcing a return to the concept of individual responsibility that was at the heart of the great experiment. That alone is worth fighting for.

As a step towards this, I think this bill should be opposed. I also think that it should be opposed because it is a massive expansion of the government, it provides no more regulation and control than is already in place, it could require all supplements to go through the same approval process as drugs at the same millions of dollars per item cost, and because the great nanny state does not need to be telling me which brand and what amount of vitamin C to take. That is up to me, and it is incumbent upon me to make an informed choice on that matter. For that is my right and my responsibility as a Citizen.

-30-

« ...howl's done

The one of late that brings a smile to my face is seeing the line “waiting for your reply with impatience.” In one instance I have little doubt that is the true emotion, but on the others I doubt it. All of which does raise the question in my mind of exactly what word or emotion is being used on the other end. Eagerly? Anxiously? (well, if that is in connotation for finding out about my rates, that could apply) Desire? Interesting.

One of the best machine translations in my book remains some work done with NASDA, the Japanese space agency. Machine translation is good for many things, but can encounter difficulties with technical issues. I loved the reply to a write-up I had done which came back with the phrase “… a microscope named Metallograph.” This had my office mate and I saying almost simultaneously “and his wife, named Metallica.” Of course, what they meant was a metallographic microscope, but it was beyond the capabilities of the program.

This also makes me wonder what my prose looks like on the other end. I can easily imagine someone looking it over, hitting a phrase, and going “What the hell???” Then laughing as they figure out from context what was meant, if not exactly what was said. Then again, I do the same thing some days, wondering just what it was I thought I was writing…

-30-

« ...howl's done

There are many memories that come forward at a time like this. You find little things that you gave your parents when you were very young, and smile at the thought that they kept them. You find the things that mattered to them, from letters to tokens to jewelry.

Then again, you find so much junk. The paperwork of life abounds, and a good bit of it hit the trash. More will be shredded. Some things I have left alone and plan to leave to my children to puzzle and amuse them. That is the reaction I had to it, so I figure it might do the same to them.

Getting rid of things is not easy for me. I was reminded of that when I found the security poster saying that pack rats are security risks. Mom’s immediate comment upon seeing that poster on a visit was to look at me and ask “And they gave YOU a security clearance?” I love you too Mom.

One thing was easy to get rid of: my Scout portrait. It was made after I had earned Eagle and God and Country, and a few other things as well. I never did really like it, and had not thought the photographic effort made was that great. Especially once I started doing it myself. It was not well done in any sense, features a really bad early 70s hair style (not a mullet, thank Ifni!), and was turning purple. In other words, it was a cheap print that had not been processed so that it would last any length of time at all. Non archival that is, and mounted on non-archival backing. A digital image was taken to see if I can clean it up a bit in Photoshop (and bury it deep in my files never to be seen again with luck), and the portrait consigned to the trash heap. I did get some other, less biased, opinions before acting, because I don’t trust myself when it comes to things about me.

I had a flashlight today and it came in handy trying to track down a few things. I never did find one box I was looking for, but can live without it for now. I also took a broom and a marker, and at least the broom came in handy.

Serendipity came into play with a lady who came in, saw me working, and detoured to see what I was up to. She ended up buying some artwork, a large copper pot, and my Mom’s costume jewelry. We are both happy and probably both feel that we got the best end of the deal. Not a bad way to leave things, though I do hope she does contact me as planned since I found yet more art.

This has also been a great reminder of something else. Life is not about the things. The things are nice, but the true treasure is what they mean. The memories they evoke for good or ill are far more important than the objects themselves. The true treasures that are found like not in monetary value, but in the love and tender memories they express.

My parents left me a true treasure: good values, self-reliance, and a lot of good memories of them and of life. It was good to be reminded of the true treasure that is not in the storage unit or elsewhere, but is inside me right now. For they are with me in the way that truly matters, in the mind, the heart, and the soul.

Thank you Mom.

Thank you Dad.

Thank you both for being with me still, now and forever.

-30-

« ...howl's done

The basic concept of charity is to provide immediate aid and comfort to those in need. Fables of all types talk of assisting those with wounds or injuries, who are in danger of death, or otherwise in momentary need. The momentary nature is implicit in almost every teaching, from a thorn in the paw to someone in need on a journey. Reading these lessons in full shows that in almost every case, the intervention is temporary and results in the individual(s) being helped recovering and then going on and doing better in their lives.

Nowhere that I have found does is say that the person doing the good has taken up a “Chinese Obligation,” not even in what Chinese texts I have read. Tithing in all religions is there, but much of that is for the running of the religion in question, with a portion going to help those less fortunate. Even there, however, is a strong suggestion that the people being helped are expected to strive, to use the money or assistance not just to get by, but to do better.

Yet, we are often faced with a demand that we do for others, even when they will not do for themselves. There are many different political groups that state you should give, willingly or by force, a significant portion of your wealth to help others. Missing from this equation, however, is any suggestion that the people being helped must strive to do better. Indeed, in many ways they are actively discouraged from doing so, for that would then lose them the aid they currently get.

Even when not connected to a political event, the demand is often made on other levels and by other individuals. You must help us. We deserve this. We demand that. In many cases, it is easy and feels good to give to others, but is this truly a good thing?

Think on this a bit. You find someone who has had a setback in life. They lost a job, something else horrible has happened, and they find themselves in a temporary position. Yes, they have been out of work for a year, but they are looking for a new job, they are doing what they can to get by. Is it wrong to help them out of a tight spot? No.

Yet, what if this continued for years? Would it then be good, or would your assistance be enabling behavior that was ultimately destructive? Would you be encouraging them to excel, to strive, to better themselves by continuing to provide assistance, or would you be allowing them to continue on as they are, without any real incentive to do better? Should you continue to do things for them, or their children, even though if you don’t they will suffer?

This is an important question and concept, for we do have a duty to our fellow man. We have an obligation to help them help themselves. But, we have also fallen into a trap of helping others, without any expectation that they will then help themselves and others.

Is it wrong to expect something back? If you are thinking in terms of indenture or similar forms of payback, then I would say yes. If, however, you are thinking in terms of the people being helped striving to do better, to reach higher so that they can then assist others, then no, it is not wrong to expect that type of payback.

Payback is essential to our world as a whole. Not the direct payback of money, but the payback of the intellect and the spirit. A “Pay It Forward” that reaps many, many larger rewards than just that of the original simple act. The world grows, and we are all the richer, when we help others to help themselves. The concept is simple and is enumerated in many forms.

Give a person food, and you feed them for a day. Teach them to farm, to hunt, and to cook, and they can feed themselves and others for a lifetime.

When looking at giving to a charity, either an organization or to individuals, examine what lies beneath. Are you helping someone with a temporary situation, so that they can not merely get through it, but can then do better? Or, will your donation of time, money, or product enable them to continue a way that is destructive of mind and spirit?

Avoid that which destroys. If there is no incentive to grow, to do better, and to pay back to the greater community, then it is not true charity. Doing such does no one any good, and is ultimately harmful to them, and to you on many levels.

If what you do will break the cycle, encourage or enable growth, and will help the recipients to help themselves, then it is true charity and worthy of all you can do.

Therefore, think before you act. Look beneath the surface, resist the easy thrill, and think. Do truly right by others, and in that way you do right by yourself, and we all will reap the rewards.

-30-

« ...howl's done

1 ream white paper
12 pack of legal pads, white
3 bundles of college rule filler paper
72 #2 pencils
48 black stick pens
1 15” beveled ruler, wood, metric/English
6 rolls invisible tape
3 pink pearl erasers
3 magic rub erasers
6 individual pencil sharpeners
1 set of 50 Crayola coloured pencils
5 boxes of white chalk
2 boxes of coloured chalk
6 folding rulers (checkout counter special)

Now, I know that not everyone is going to put a crowbar in it like I did, so here are some options for different amounts:

$5.00
36 #2 pencils

$10.00
36 #2 pencils
1 bundle of college rule filler paper
1 individual pencil sharpener
2 boxes of white chalk

$20.00
36 #2 pencils
1 bundle of college rule filler paper
1 individual pencil sharpener
2 boxes of white chalk
1 set of 50 Crayola coloured pencils
1 15” beveled ruler, wood, metric/English

$30.00
36 #2 pencils
1 bundle of college rule filler paper
1 individual pencil sharpener
2 boxes of white chalk
1 set of 50 Crayola coloured pencils
1 15” beveled ruler, wood, metric/English
1 ream white paper
48 black stick pens

Now, if I can do $60.00 in my circumstances, you can do something. So get out there, go buy some supplies, and get them to:

Chief Wiggles
CPA-C2, Debriefer
APO AE 09335

As a challenge to other blogs, I am calling a local TV station about this, and am going to issue a personal challenge to groups and businesses with whom I am involved. I double dare you to do the same.

« ...howl's done

My feet and legs have been bothering me a bit of late, and the back has had some complaints as well. I thought a lot of the back was related to lack of healing, foolish moves on my part, and all such as that. Then, something made me look at my shoes.

They had caved. More than just a slide, the inner sides of my shoes had collapsed better than a quarter inch in comparison with the outer side under the pounding of my whopping two miles a day on the treadmill. Seems they are not made for serious walking or use at a gym. Seems that working out and them wearing them around during normal activities is more than they are designed to withstand.

Now, I liked my classics. They were understated, even boring, and as such I could get away with wearing them lots of places so that I was much more comfortable than I would otherwise have been. They were reliable, after all I had been buying them for the last 15 or so years.

Tennis shoes today have little or nothing to do with tennis. They have everything to do with flash and are designed to attract the over-stimulated minds of the tweens. I don’t care for a lot of flash, which take all your cash, because I don’t talk trash, I do the bash. Yet, within this brave new world of shoes I have been successfully avoiding for some time, there are some pockets of sanity.

A salesman today, who had no chance of making me a sale, gave good advice after he pointed out that he sold flash, and I was more interested in structure. He made recommendations as to specific shoes, specific features, and even told me the stores that sold them. If I can ever steer business his way, I will. For those that can’t do the walk, I will send them to the best place for the flash.

There were two brands recommended to me, with several different models. I ended up getting two pairs of shoes: one for the gym, and one for the rest of the day. The Reeboks are clearly no long up to the challenge, so they are gone. Shame as there is an outlet store for them up in Nashville… Sorry, the Scot in me coming out.

What I settled on were New Balance. I got the 580 for everyday use, and the 855 for gym and treadmill. Both have anti-roll systems to prevent cave-ins, turns, and problems with the arches, along with extra padding in the places where I like it. The next-runner-up was a good brand, but did not feel as good in the fit. I am going to try some new super-duper inserts as well on the 855s to see how they do.

The only drawback right now is that the feet are having to adjust to not being off by so many degrees and/or turned. Doing all the shopping also let the blood sugar get out of whack a bit, since most snacks at a mall or shopping centers tend to be high carb. Things are evening out all around, and the feet will soon adjust. It is not how I planned or needed to spend the day in terms of work, but it quite clearly was how I needed to spend it for my health.

It also is helping me out of a rut, for simply because there is so much flash in the shoe market today, doesn’t mean that it is nothing but trash.

-30-

« ...howl's done

Nowhere in this screed was there any hint that parents have any responsibility for their children. No suggestion that parents need to keep up with what the kids are doing, much less take the responsibility to raise them such that the kids could make intelligent choices about alcohol and behavior. From what was being said, children should be kept from knowing of alcohol until such time as they turned legal age, lest they be corrupted.

The flaw in this logic is obvious, and so obvious that no one will deal with it. The commercial, and the group behind it, are a part of the societal responsibility group that feels that we need a nanny state to monitor and control all. To them, there is no such thing as individual responsibility, only a threat that demands immediate action to prevent harm “to the children.”

It is equally clear that parents will have no leeway on this. No cultural traditions count, if an Italian baby gets watered wine, then a crime is committed. No common sense about taboo items, much less the notion of moderate use. A sip of wine or beer, much less rubbing gums with whisky during teething, and intervention is demanded.

Instead, there will be a new set of laws, a loss of individual freedoms, further restrictions on “enemies of the children” and those evil corporations, and a decisive blow against that destroyer of youth. Never mind that the corporations in question are already highly regulated, or that there are a few hundred laws already on the books including federal laws about legal ages and sales. Never mind that the hypocrisy of the current mindset is helping fuel the very problem they claim to be solving.

Indeed, the new program is flawed in such a way to guarantee that it will become self-perpetuating and even more intrusive. All the better for the new social Gestapo to force changes in society and give themselves more power.

The answer lies not in new laws, but in a new mindset. One that says parents are responsible for their children. One that says that even though they are not yet adults, neither are they children and that teenagers will have to face responsibility for their own actions. No one is forcing them to drink, they are making that individual choice on their own. No one is forcing them to binge or otherwise drink irresponsibly, again that is their choice. Hold both accountable, and enforce the current laws before adding more. Quit making the juvenile justice system a joke, and with real responsibility will come real change.

If the children are given better knowledge and a less hypocritical set of guidelines, and if the parents are allowed to and required to actually raise and take responsibility for their children, then the problems will be small. Kids are going to do some experimenting, deal with it. I did, and I did not do anything too terribly stupid. Then again, my parents had already taught me about alcohol and responsibility. My classmates looked after each other, with one classmate in particular who took keys away from all who came to a certain place where we gathered, and did not give them back if you were not sober and fit to drive.

Responsibility. Pass it on, and give a pass to the particularly bad idea being advertised.

-30-

« ...howl's done

His Mom is a good teacher and an outstanding homeschooler. Once the tooth was taken care of, at least in the immediate sense, she explained to him that he could loose a quart of blood before needing a transfusion. She then did a wonderful demonstration by getting a quart of water and putting red colouring in it. They then went in the backyard and poured out one eighth a cup of it on the picnic table. Lot of “blood,” and the light clicked with Chance who realized that it did not take a lot to look like a lot. They then poured out the full quart and compared. Not only was he much reassured, he now knows that blood/bleeding does not equal dying, he has had the basic lessons in the cardiovascular system reinforced, as well as basic biology. The lessons are continuing, and expanding a bit. Chance probably also now knows more than he ever wanted to know about emergency dentistry. His mom is in the same boat.

Chance is doing well, though not completely happy at soft food for a week. The tooth is in and while there are no guarantees, things are positive. Only time will tell if the tooth will re-root and be healthy. Mommy (and Daddy, though he won’t admit it) may come down from the ceiling sometime soon. Uncle Laughing Wolf never made the ceiling, but is just glad his eldest Godson is doing okay.

-30-

« ...howl's done

Now, in my defense, I feel I did a reasonably good job of dealing with it at the time of Dad’s death. I had picked out the things I absolutely wanted and then invited in the family to pick and choose out of what was left. The rules were simple: no complaints, and anyone who did not play nicely did not get to play at all. I think that most of my family is above some of what I have seen in other families at times like this, and I was largely rewarded in that thought. There was one example made, and anyone else tempted towards such either thought better or were muzzled. To be honest, I did not care which.

Out of the things I kept, most made sense. Mom’s piano I kept for sentimental reasons and for a dream I had, where I had a nice house and a place for the piano. Maybe my wife, when and if, or a child, when and if, would play it. My own playing of most musical instruments tends to have people understanding why such can be banned as an instrument of war. There were other things, such as my Dad’s military citations and other things that should go directly to a son.

Then there were other things that now have me scratching my head a bit, such as Mom and Dad’s bed. It is a nice bed, antique I think, solid wood and very well made. Sturdy, like them. For some reason, I elected to keep it even though in retrospect I wonder why since I know that I will never use it. It isn’t like the sideboard or china cabinet, that I lust to have in place. The bed joins some other items about which I now puzzle.

Most of this has been sitting in storage. My job at NASA required a good bit of travel, and going through such takes time. Nor was I foolish enough to do it at the time, which is always a mistake. I knew the time would come when I would be ready to go through it. That time has come. It is time to let go, on several levels.

It is not an easy task. Not just the mental and emotional, but on a very physical level since the storage unit was not packed as I had asked it to be. The movers did a good job, but ignored most of my requests so mining operations are going to be interesting. I am not looking forward to that part of it.

Each piece I come to will have a world of emotions tied up in it. The piano is one, for in it were tied up many dreams of the future. It was to me the symbol of a warm and happy home. I played at learning the piano on it, and Mom did play it. She was a good player, though not great. It gave her comfort when she was down, and joy at any time else to play. She did not do it as much as she must have wanted to, but she did play.

Now, I say that Mom was a good player for a reason. She quit playing the piano before she died, and while she denied it Dad and I knew the real reason: our dog. Ralph the beagle was a character. An alcoholic with a taste for fine bourbon, an epileptic, and a true momma’s boy. Anywhere that mommy went, Ralph was sure to go. Ralph liked her playing, and being a good momma’s boy, he decided to sing along.

This did not have the effect he expected, or desired. It brought consternation from Mom. It brought not successfully suppressed amusement from Dad and brother, along with some joking comments that only made mommy mad. Despite this, and despite repeated pleas from Mom, Ralph continued to sing. Mom quit.

I don’t know if she ever touched the piano again while she lived, and if she did not that is a shame. She really was not bad.

The china cabinet is another. It is dark wood, well built, and has elaborate carvings and a curved glass front. It scares the hell out of me to this day. When I was quite young, one of the glass shelves in it broke and fell, and Mom immediately accused me of being responsible, though I was no where near it. Saner heads, in the form of Dad, came to my defense but Mom’s reaction was such that for years I refused to touch it, scared that to do so would get me yelled at again. The piece is an antique, but no one knows its story. It came into my parent’s life when they got married in the late 50s. They found it in the rescue missions store downtown, at the bargain price of $60.00. That was a lot in those days, but a bargain none-the-less, so they got it.

I intend to purge it of all demons and ghosts, and use it to build a new generation of good memories and heirlooms to hand down to my children. I know not when that will be, but I am determined on both fronts, the cabinet and the family. There are several things that I intend to have for that, including the sideboard that I adore. I can see the tea chest up on it now, a silver tray beside it holding the crystal decanters I have collected in my life, and a few other selected items reflecting in the wood and mirror back. One day.

There are stories like this for each and every item that awaits. From the lone plate of its type in the china to each of the major pieces. It is time to face them, cherish them, and in some cases let them go. I have already given Mom’s family a chance to get some of the items, and have now opened up to the larger family of blood and as-blood. Then, if none act, I will move to sell the things on the open market.

My hope is that some of the family will take some of the items. It would be best if some things were kept in the blood, but a part of me disagrees. It is only fair that someone else have the chance to find a treasure somewhere, to bring it into their lives and start something new and precious, just as my parents did with the china cabinet. To start a new dynasty of tradition and family heirlooms is a wonderful thing.

With that in mind, I have also looked at some other things in my life, and have decided it is time to move on. My bed is one of them.

It is a large bed, king size, but the large comes from the fact that it is handmade out of solid cherry. It was my woodworking 101 project at college, and like many of my early dreams it is not completely finished.

The bed itself is. The headboard and footboard are solid and plain, with about 20 coats of lacquer on the boards. Each component was taken from rough lumber, joined, planed, and the brought together with care. The finished pieces were sanded down, and not just roughly. I can’t think of how much 600 grit sandpaper I used, or even finer steel wool, in sanding the wood and each of the coats of lacquer.

It was originally designed not to have posts, but structural considerations required they be added. This was done in something of a hurry, and they are largely unfinished because there was brasswork to be added, and a set of cabinets/bookshelves to be put in place at the top of the headboard. Time and money prevented this in college, and in real life there were other things that needed doing first. It has been a part of my life, and a memory of my youth, for some time now. Yet, it is time to put it aside and start a new chapter in my life. So, it and its almost new mattress are going to be offered up.

As soon as it sells, I will make use of the guest bed to be my bed for now. When I marry, we will look at a new one. I do say when, rather than if, even though there are no immediate prospects on the horizon. I do, however, think it important for two newly become one to agree on a marriage bed, and that in some ways it might be best if it were new, so that neither brings old baggage to the mix.

The guest bed will be replaced with another antique, also in storage. Even thinking of its story brings a smile to my face as I type. For years, it languished up at our cabin, and people did not like to sleep upon it. The mattress was okay, but the bed itself was something else.

It was black as the Earl of Hell’s waistcoat, and a nasty black it was. Old shellac and such cracked like burnt skin, hiding what there was of carving and decoration. The wood itself could not be seen, and many thought that a blessing. One day, after I had gone to college, Mom got fed up with how dark the bed was, and how gloomy it helped make the room it was in, so home it came. It would be stripped and painted white.

She began stripping it, and discovered that there were lots of nooks, crannies, and even carving/patterns. Mom got old toothbrushes from neighbors to get into all the places, and gradually peeled back the layers, and saw what lay beneath.

Walnut. Glorious, vibrant, walnut with grain patterns fit for a king. A range of colour that was a sight to behold, light more than dark, and pattern work with the wood that none had truly expected. I no longer remember from where that bed came, but think it was a piece from Mom’s family long ago. Wherever it came from, whomever it came from, all I can say is thank you. That piece will be my guest bed.

It is time for change. The old Le Menu plates are soon to be gone from my shelves, lost to old age. All the other parts of my childhood and youth are slowly fading away, or flat out dying. All save a few solid foundations. Foundations for a new life, and new family traditions.

This is as it should be. It is time to set aside the life that was, to face the fact that a new life should be built, and that I am now in the role my parents found themselves in when they met and married. It is time to face the fact that they are indeed gone, and that I can no longer call and talk, and get sage advice.

Yet, that is not completely true, for they did their job. They raised me, gave me a good foundation of morals, sense, and the ways of thought. Their shades are with me still, and their spirit guides me. My path is not theirs, but when in doubt I can still turn to that spirit for guidance, even if I can’t hear their voice with my ears. I can look at the items that remain, the core items which help shore up this new life.

Those pillars remain, around which I will build a happy home, bright with joy and warm with love. Some of that light and love will come from these items, and they will reflect the joy and love created in this new home.

The rest, well, it is time to share some of that love and joy with the world. To plant seeds of such in new homes and lives. The items I sell I send out for this purpose. For that too is what each of us should do. In that way, we are all better for it.

-30-

« ...howl's done

Author and philosopher Robert Heinlein referred to manners as the social lubricant, and that is no less than the truth. Manners as we know them started as a way of indicating not merely rank, but good intentions. The handshake came about as a way of showing that one was unarmed and of good will. Given that for most the right hand is dominant and therefore the weapon hand, it was a demonstration of good faith and good will to grasp the right forearm or hand of the person you were meeting. As for lefties, there was something sinister about them and being the minority they had to both adapt, and accept a tacit advantage given by the majority. By the way, if you did not get the previous pun, go look up sinister in a good dictionary and scan down into the “other” meanings.

Many table manners came about for reasons of good will, not to mention good health. I also rather suspect a strong desire for more pleasurable sights was also a factor, as few truly like to watch someone chew with their mouth open. Manners prevented disturbances at the table caused by jostling and such, prevented the spread of germs (and food poisoning, but that is another tale), and worked to reduce the cleanup required after a meal.

Given these historical origins, there are those out there who consider manners unneeded. Never mind the fact that they can be a way of helping ease situations, prevent misunderstandings and fights, they are old fashioned. A lack of knowledge, or an abundance of pseudo-knowledge, calls for them to be instruments of oppression though they are not and never truly were such.

Indeed, I think some of the misinformation may be deliberate, since there are two fundamental underlying principles that fly in the face of certain forms of social engineering. Simply put, manners are a way of saying to another “You Matter” and proclaiming to the world that you think about and care for others. In other words, manners are a way of saying that you can and do think of something besides yourself.

Being courteous towards others is the ultimate sign of respect, both to them and to yourself. It says very clearly to them that they are a unique person, worthy of respect, and that you are willing to give that to them. It also says that you have enough self-confidence, enough respect for yourself, that you can share the wealth and give respect to others.

Manners matter. Good manners, in interactions or at the table, show what you truly are and what you think of those around you. Show respect for others, and most of all yourself, by exercising them in every situation.

-30-

« ...howl's done

The Arby's in Madison earned my ire when I used one of their dollar off coupons for the hamburgers. Per their instructions at the window, and not at the order spot, the first thing I said to the person was that I had a coupon. They acknowledged, and I placed my order. They did not do the coupon, and I got a VERY nasty look at the window, and a lot of attitude and poor service from there on out. A demand for the receipt back and no receipt with the meal was the least of it. A call to complain to the manager went unaswered, but I did not expect much since it appeared that the manager was the one who took the order and was so rude. A shame as there are some really good people there that if I had their names I would cheerfully right a letter of commendation for them.

The Arby's also messed up an order and was unwilling to do much about it, other than to say they couldn't talk because a huge crowd was there. They must have come in after I had left, as they were deserted when I got what I did get of my order.

The Burger King messed up as well, and part of it was my fault in that I did not check everything at every step. I should not have to, but... The manager did make some effort, but I got the impression that it was grudging and token, and that it was all my fault and not theirs.

Just a quick thought to those in customer service. Don't have a policy of asking the customer what do they want you to do about it. It can come across very poorly, either as "Yeah, so what do you expect ME to do about it and why should I care" or "Well, what unreasonable thing do you expect to extort out of us for this?" It also leaves you open for unreasonable demands. What works best all around is to immediately tell the person that the next time that same order is free. Don't embelish it with add ons, just stick to the main menu items involved. A quick apology, the next time is free, and get info to identify who screwed up and how so you can fix what needs fixing. That works, it avoids a lot of problems, and it will keep people like me from letting the world know you screwed up. The right attitude makes all the difference in the world.

-30-

« ...howl's done

Yet, the time came when I had enough. Not of poor service, because when I called customer service, I usually found reasonably helpful people and got things fixed. Not because of poor service in terms of not being able to make calls. No, the problem was much more insidious than that.

You see, I got tired of the telemarketers. The call that came late the evening, just at the edge of acceptable calling hours, was almost guaranteed to be you. The calls that came in droves while I was dealing with family medical issues and problems. The calls that would not stop.

“We’re sorry. That information wasn’t on our list” got to be real old, real fast. As was the pathetic excuse given that there were many different divisions, and many different lists, and that you were too uncoordinated, inefficient, and uncaring to have a universal do not call list. Heck, you even took a page from the sex offender manual and blamed the victim, or at least a couple of your callers did. “You agreed to this.” “Well, you didn’t rule it out, so you accepted these calls.”

I asked. I demanded. I pleaded. Take. Me. Off. No joy, the calls continued. They continued up until the day I said I was leaving. That I had had enough of the harassment, annoyance, and wasting of my time. That I was going to leave you. Funny how it all stopped right then, when you could not shut if off before, isn’t it?

I bet you thought I was bluffing that day, when I said I was leaving. You hear it a lot, I am sure. You probably thought that it was a bluff because I did not leave the next day. Well, you were wrong. I was leaving, I just took the time to do some research. I talked to friends, checked around, looked at ratings and evaluations, and I took my time.

Finally, the day came and I did leave. I had made you a promise, though I doubt you understood it. A threat I am sure you thought it, and a baseless one at that. After all, I didn’t leave the next day. Nope, indeed I did not. But I have left today.

Well, to be honest it was last week and I took great delight in removing the anti-slam protocols with the local phone provider. It was an even greater pleasure to tell them to switch me to my new provider, you know, the one who has blown you out of the water on almost every independent evaluation. Between them and a certain 10-10 number, I am beating the heck out of your rates. No more hassles, no more having to sign up for specialized overseas calling options, and – best of all – no more damned, triple-damned spam interrupting my meals, my home life, and intruding into delicate situations.

Since I did keep my promise, you may decide to start spamming me again. Think again. I signed up at that nice federal registry, and I will take great delight in turning you in to them with time, date, and any information I can get. To put icing on the cake, I am hereby notifying you that if you call me you will be in use of my professional time and that you will be billed for use of said time. I have a special rate for telemarketers of $250.00 per hour, with a three hour minimum. In other words, you will get a bill for $750.00, since any such call by you is acceptance of these publicly posted and e-mailed terms. Even if I can’t get you to pay, I can tie you up and cost you a lot more money than that. So, like I said, think again.

So, I now leave you for what appears to be better service and greener pastures. I hope that you, Danny, and all your practices enjoy each other. Especially since I know for a fact that I am not the only one to leave you for this reason. Enjoy.

-30-

« ...howl's done

Much of the problem, as with many problems involving space, lies at NASA. Within that agency, there are two schools of thought with one being dominant. There is the minor school that holds with the idea that industry should select and do (and fund) commercial research designed to investigate the feasibility of space and microgravity for a variety of purposes. Then there is the larger school, which holds that they have developed or have designed some nifty something, and that industry should now fund it or pay NASA loads of money for developing, marketing, and actually doing the work. This is the same group that put forward the proposition that industry would be willing to throw money at NASA and the ISS for the sheer adventure, money that NASA could then do with what it wanted since industry would, of course, expect nothing in return. This is the same group that wanted companies to sponsor ISS racks, and was amazed that companies were not willing to do this if they could not have their logos on the sponsored hardware or have the sponsored rack referred to as the __________ Rack.

For many years, this larger group has put forth a variety of items as precursors for space manufacturing, or that were presented as true leaps in space commercialization. If you go back and look at them, most of them were NASA-developed hardware or ideas that industry was brought in on well after development. In short, it was a glorified spin-off operation rather than a true commercial development.

Adding to this was the deliberate downplay by NASA of true commercial research being done. It was not promoted, and sometimes was even presented as NASA research. A long-standing effort on my part was to break NASA PAO of the habit of stating “NASA did X” in regards commercial research. No, NASA did not do X. Company Y, (most often) in partnership with Commercial Space Center Z did X, with the assistance of NASA. There is a heck of a difference there.

It also does not help that NASA is incredibly risk averse. Anything that can be labled a “failure” is something to be buried and forgotten. A story or brochure that raised Dan’s ire was to be burned and buried, and an experiment or investigation that was not a complete success? Much the same, alas.

As for the “stand back, they are going to throw money at us” grandiose ideal as presented by the two Dan(s), well… As far as I can tell, NASA got zero dollars and nothing else out of those operations. Yet, they were billed as the epitome of space commercialization that would unlock the doors. Yeah, right.

The string of failures is bad enough, but worse yet is the poisoning of the terms that has occurred as a result. People, including a number of experts, have accepted the use of the terms space manufacturing and space commercialization for these efforts even though they are nothing of the sort. The net result is that you have “proof” that space manufacturing and space commercialization, or any specific segment of same, don’t work.

Bull.

The fact is, we really don’t know all that much about any area – with a couple of exceptions. The fact is and remains that research by industry for industry has a miniscule amount of research time in place. In fact, it is just enough time to develop good questions and determine how to proceed with investigations, rather than to make any form of judgment.

On the ground, if often takes months or years of research simply to identify which way to go with a given research project. Computer simulations and other operations can help shorten it, but the usual result of early experimentation is a lot more questions rather than pat answers.

The amount of time spent on true commercial research in space is measured in weeks, not months and years. There are some extremely promising areas, but very little has been proven from an economic or research viewpoint. We are still very much in the early idea stage, but as I have stated repeatedly, I also think that it is a stage where money can be made when regular, low-cost space access becomes available. The Shuttle ain’t it. The Big Dumb Boosters of Bomart ain’t it. Russian rockets ain’t it.

The real hope for exploring all the areas of potential research, development, and manufacturing lies in real access to space. It needs someone to win the X-prize, and it needs several competing services. Then, not only can research into the real opportunities for space commerce and manufacturing take off, the rest of us can as well.

Forget the “accepted” definitions of space manufacturing and space commercialization as espoused by NASA and others. Take back the terms and apply them as they were meant to be applied.

-30-

« ...howl's done

Now, to repeat ad nauseum, yes I did work as a contract employee for NASA and the Space Product Development (SPD) Program. Keep that in mind as we go, though my bias may not be what you expect.

The fact remains that despite its shortcomings, SPD did a great deal for space commercialization. While they could not directly fund any research, what was done was to get the broadest possible range of businesses involved to do their research in space or microgravity. This did several things, including: demonstrate hard numbers as to businesses and types of business interested in space-based research and development; allow a variety of areas to be explored by companies to determine if they would be useful or profitable to companies; provide actual dollar figures in terms of the amount of money – cash and in-kind – that industry was willing to invest in space business; and, provide hard data on the economic return of the investment in space-based R&D.

The program operates through commercial space centers located across the country. With one exception, they were located at institutions of higher learning. The idea behind this was to bring together the academic knowledge and research capabilities with the real-world knowledge and practice of industry, and then apply the synergy that comes from making use of NASA resources including access to space and microgravity.

The academic institutions benefited from the investment in the centers by industry, and through having faculty and students work on real-world applications. The benefits to the students in terms of practical education is obvious, as are the other benefits. Industry benefited by being able to make use of the academic knowledge base, research facilities, and the low-cost labor (students) for the work, as well as from the unique environment of orbital space. NASA benefited by meeting its legal requirements under the NASA Charter and the various commercial space acts. The U.S. economy benefited from the research dollars and from the money that has come from new products and companies, and U.S. education reaped much needed benefits as well.

Space commercialization benefited as well. First, the program clearly showed that there were several hundred companies of all sizes and types interested in space as an R&D tool or possible tool. The amount of cash and in-kind contribution is trackable and documents for all that industry was willing to invest millions in cash and in-kind contributions. The product economic benefit is harder to track, but can be demonstrated both in product sales (there are better than 20 products on the market that come not from spin-offs but from companies doing or preparing to do research in space and microgravity) and in the capitalization of various spin-off companies. Spinning off divisions and companies is a great sign of economic growth and vitality. All of this is now documented for the investment community.

I use the past tense even though the program still exists, because it is scheduled to die. The ivory tower types at OMB have declared its death, and the White House agrees. It seems that not only was the program a well-documented success, the horror, but that the commercial space centers were as well. This success seems to grate on certain types, both within NASA and at OMB. The former hate commercialization with a passion, while the latter lack real-world experience.

The death knell comes because the centers are not recompeted each year. This, you see, is unfair to any other potential centers. Never mind that they are subject to an outside audit on a regular basis, and that new centers are started and centers that fail to attract industry partners and investment are eliminated. The academics have spoken, and being a success is not allowed. This ignores several basic facts, the first one being “Would you invest large sums of money in an entity that might not be here in six to twelve months?” Would you commit to a long-term research program with someone who might not be there in a few months? Logic is not necessarily an important commodity in governmental planning and operations.

So, SPD is dead. Long live SPD. Yet, there is no need to waste the important foundation they have laid. It is clear that NASA is not the place for commercial development. NASA is fundamentally opposed on a philosophic and operational level to commercial operations and research. Fine, why not put the commercial emphasis where it is respected and encouraged: the Department of Commerce.

Yet, rather than just push SPD over, why not take the time to do it right. Why not do the things that are going to help commercial space development, all the things NASA was opposed to doing?

The first thing that is needed is leadership from outside the government and the usual gang from Bomart. You need someone with real-world leadership, proven success in business, who also knows space. The ideal candidate would have experience in a true space startup, as well as the needed corporate experience. Team them with a deputy director who has been involved with SPD and other activities, who knows the nuts and bolts of what has been done. The synergy here is obvious, as is the business lead.

Then give them a charter worthy of the goal. This new division would do the following:

Expand the base built by SPD at NASA. There is a good deal of research and economic data there, as well as some good models. Take that and build on it by looking into the areas that gave NASA hives, including advertising, direct sponsorship, tourism, remote tourism, new areas of research, etc.

The basic commercial space center concept worked well, but needs to be revamped a bit. No, not just to meet the idiocy of the OMB recompete requirements, but to make it even more effective. The key to the centers was the industry involvement. Get input from industry on the areas currently addressed, those areas where they have already expressed an interest, and see if there are new areas as well. Use that as the basis of a competition for 15-20 centers that will be established for a term of no less than five years, with options for additional increments for a total of up to ten years.

These centers would then have the stability to attract industry yet meet any whining about fairness. Have them subject to the same type of external review as is current, with an eye towards eliminating any that fail to meet the requirements for number of industry partners, cash and in-kind contributions, etc. At the end of ten years, they can then start a new recompete cycle, with the industry partners and trade associations having inputs. Those that don’t make the grade at five years are eliminated, or if close, can be given one or two year extensions to see if they can make the grade. If they don’t, they go. If they do, they continue. If a new area is identified with or by industry, then a new center can be started. This ensures continuity, fairness, and much more.

Now, since these centers are no longer tied to NASA, that means they don’t have to use just NASA for launch and operations. They can make us of any launch service and should be required by charter to use commercial launch, research, and related facilities wherever possible, with the usual caveats towards new and small businesses. This means that if Scaled Composites, XCOR, or others succeed, they will have an almost guaranteed customer base with commercial research. It would also open the door for competing space facilities, both space platforms and space stations. Just think of the opportunities, and competition, there.

In addition, until such is available, NASA should be required to provide access on the same low-cost basis as is currently being provided. Fair is only fair, after all. It was the dependency on NASA that resulted in the miniscule amount of commercial research that has actually flown. To date, with just a few exceptions, the potential for space-based research and development is really not known.

What is needed is time in space so that all the elegant theories can be tested for commercial viability. Can microgravity make it easier to do some things? Will the conditions encourage certain biological processes or activities? Can certain data be gathered with higher precision in an easier manner? Stay tuned, as we find out the answers. It will only be with this time that we start to find out what can benefit and where space business can start to go in terms of research, development, and – eventually – production. Not just manufacturing, but a host of other areas as well.

Now, this is a nice start, but should only be one part of what is done. The second thing that needs to be done is to establish this new operation as the focal point for coordinating government regulation of commercial space activities. This way, industry and government can be brought together to develop some realistic guidelines and operations to the benefit of all, in a Department that is at least reasonably favorable towards business.

The best way to do this would be to establish a committee with several representatives from the new space industry (XCOR, Elon Musk, Sea Launch), at least one representative from the Bomart group, and one each from the relevant government agencies. This committee would advise and discuss with a manager from the new program, who would be charged with developing a coordinated government policy and acting as an advocate for space commerce. They would need a staff and related support.

Third, this new operation should act as a clearing house and coordination for research that can benefit commercial space activities. Energy, Defense, NASA, and other agencies do a great deal of research into materials, propulsion, control, and other activities that could benefit companies looking at going into space. Particularly those companies who have hit a snag in the development process. Why not give them an office they can turn to who can then see if anyone else has addressed a particular problem? Why not provide them with a low-cost means of leasing specialized testing facilities that would otherwise be unused or under-utilized? Make use of the research data and research facilities to benefit companies and competition.

It would have to do one SPD job, however. The new operation would have to continue to be a buffer between NASA and other government launch operations and industry. Few if any companies are going to be willing to put up with the paperwork, testing, and hurdles that go into flying with NASA. So, until real commercial comes along, that buffer will continue to be needed.

The final thing is that it needs to have a sunset clause. To prevent it from becoming a problem, rather than an asset, it needs to be set to expire in no less than 30 years with options to close down the centers sooner if the basic research needed to prove concepts is completed. This will be determined by activities such that industry is no longer funding research into if space is a potential benefit and/or when industry and is spending in excess of $500 million a year with private service companies on direct research, development, or production. Actually, this needs to be broken down a bit to cover major research areas so that they can be phased out and new areas identified as and if needed.

This is just a rough outline, but it is a fair start. Now for the budget issues, since the first question is what will it cost? Fair enough. To create this program will cost app. $50 million for the centers, including startup and competitions, with a recurring cost of at least $35 million per year thereafter. The coordination and regulation role will probably take $20 million per year, while the research coordination/assistance operation should have around $35 million per year at the start. Launch costs will be at least $50 million per year for now and general operating budgets will probably be on the order of $20 million for salaries, facilities, travel, equipment, outreach and education, and related administrative activities. This is all off the cuff, but is a good starting point for discussions. Round it a bit and call it $225 million to start.

This should not be too far off the full budget for SPD using full-cost accounting. So, it is not a major increase or decrease in the budget. It has the potential to provide a great deal more to support business development in space and a solid foundation to build upon. There are a few more bells and whistles that need to be added before it can be written up as a bill, but not a whole lot more. The basics are here.

So, what do you think?

« ...howl's done

Some of this was touched on yesterday, so bear with me if you see repetition. Then again, repetition is good since it takes a lot of pounding to get some ideas through thick skulls.

The first thing to address is NASA bashing, and the taking of cheap shots at people who dare disagree in any manner with some “True Believers.” Taking shots at NASA is easy, for there is much there to criticize. There are many things that need to be pointed out, for good or for ill, but there are a large number of people who simply appear to live to hate NASA.

Everyone needs a hobby, but it really should not be your life. I have attended events where the group I have come to call the “True Believers” took over and destroyed any chance at reasonable discussion. They hate NASA and feel that if NASA were not there all would be great and we would be out to the stars by now. The lack of any concrete proof for such is not a deterrent to them.

The fact is, there is good cause for space/commercial space enthusiasts to be less than enthusiastic with NASA. NASA has tried to control regulation of all commercial space activities to the detriment of same, acted as a barrier to a number of ventures, and jealously guards its prerogatives and its place as the launch center for the U.S. NASA is not friendly in the least to space entrepreneurs, and is about as speedy as a hibernating tortoise in getting any project done.

Yet, I have seen the “True Believers” take things to absurd lengths, such that I have thought that I was in a Monty Python sketch. NASA blocked this effort, NASA blocked that effort, NASA refused to pay for my commercial space idea, NASA should get out of propulsion/guidance/etc. and give all the that work to me and my company, NASA is responsible for the crops being moldy, NASA is responsible for my cousin’s ears looking funny. Got news for all of you, NASA is not responsible if your cousin’s mom had a fling with Prince Charles; NASA is not bloody likely to pay for all the development costs of your great commercial idea, especially if it doesn’t get anything back; and, NASA is not likely to support anything that cuts into its own power. That’s reality, deal with it.

If you want change, you have to do more than just complain. Anyone can complain, and politicians hear a lot of complaints. Most are “noted” and promptly File 13’d. If you provide a specific instance, specific people, and other documentation, you may get a congressional staffer to look into it a bit. If there is tangible evidence of a real problem, and not just someone not getting something they wanted exactly as they wanted it, then a real congresscritter will get involved and change sought.

If you want to get any attention paid to you, quit complaining. Or, rather, quit just complaining in a ludicrous manner. Offer a solution.

As I said before, politicians get lots of complaints. What they seldom get is someone or some group coming in and saying “We know there are problems, here is a documented (Note the word, documented) list of them, and here is a proposed solution. Here is how it should be done, here are the political necessities, here is the budget impact, and here is an implementation plan.” Best yet, the plan should show how the effort will save money, because in addition to complaints the other major communication politicians get is “Give me money for my pet project.” Avoid both those traps, and you will start to get serious staffer and congresscritter attention. Learn how the system really works, and play it.

This is why when I called for abolishing NASA, I also issued a call for ideas on what a space agency should do. I have some, but if this is to be serious in terms of both dialog/rational discourse and a call for action, it has to be more than the usual chorus of “NASA is evil and should be destroyed.” Your ideas will be combined with my ideas, and a serious proposal set forth for debate and discussion.

The fact is that the government is not going to get out of space, so how can we ensure that what is done truly helps. That is not a question, but a challenge. One way I see is to get true space commercialization out of NASA and into the Department of Commerce, where it might have a fighting chance to do some real good.

The second point that is going to give the pro-space taliban-types a real headache is to quit with the myopic focus. You can’t just sit there and scream that NASA is evil and bad. You can’t just look at it from a technology/specific outcome point-of-view. You have to look at it from the point of view of potential customers and potential investors. They don’t care how cool anything is, or how evil you think NASA, only what it can do/does it mean for them.

This is particularly true when attacking an entity that has some of the highest positive name recognition in history. The average member of the public thinks of the lunar landings, the marvel of the shuttle, and has not a clue of the true problems that exist. Even when something like Challenger or Columbia comes up, it is often seen as an anomaly. Presented the right way, information can reach and change this viewpoint. Done as many NASA haters are doing it, it can have precisely the opposite effect. Word to the wise.

Also, when I said that space tourism was limited previously, I very clearly stated that it was limited from an investor’s point of view. In terms of potential, and what I would love to see, it is unlimited. I hope that the future as envisioned by Heinlein, Kotani, Roberts, and others comes true with lots of space tourist travel and opportunities, and I have been working to try to make such come true.

The fact remains that only the potential is unlimited. From the point of view of venture capitalists, investment bankers, and others, it is still largely unproven. That is not a NASA viewpoint, it is not my viewpoint, but it is the point of view of the financial community. To quote from my post of the other day, “The fact is, we know that there are at least two people who are willing to fork out $20 million to go to space, and that there are a number of others who are interested in so doing. We know that there are X number of people who can afford this, and that of that number that Y percentage are capable of meeting all requirements and going, and that of Y that there are Z percentage that have expressed interest. From this, market research has shown that if the cost of going to space comes down, more people are interested in going. In fact, the number grows significantly the lower the cost becomes.” The fact remains, however, that only two people have gone and everything else remains to be proven.

Anyone who is serious about getting into space needs to quit looking through the wishful thinking glasses and start looking through the investment glasses. What will it take to get funding?

Simple. It will take XCOR and Scaled Composites, or some other group to be successful. Ideally, we need three companies to make it, and best yet at least three companies in each of the major throw weights. Settling for the more realistic, it takes at least two companies to make it, and bring the price down. When they do that, there will be certifiable and documented proof of how many are willing to fly at what price. Projections and studies are nice, but seeing people actually pay to fly is the coin of the financial realm. Once people are flying sub-orbital and to orbit on a regular and paying basis, then you have what you need to meet the viewpoint of investors.

Look at it from their perspective. Investors have heard for years that there is a lot of interest in space tourism. Yet, only two people have flown and future flights have had problems because of funding flow and because of NASA. The funding flow problems predated most of the major NASA issues, so that is what investors see. Investors also question the true amount of business that will use space for any purpose. If there were a large demand, then there would be more efforts to develop new launch opportunities – again, from their viewpoint.

I also want to point out that I was not endorsing space manufacturing as a sole option, nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, I pointed out fairly plainly that space manufacturing is not an immediate possibility. To quote from one post: “If nothing else, the program has shown that there is a business opportunity for basic industrial research in space. There are many theories about how a variety of businesses could benefit from doing research and development in space, and possibly even production there. The problem is, very few of them have ever truly been explored and proven or disproved. For all the time that the program has existed, the actual amount of time that has been devoted to commercial research in space is beyond miniscule.”

What I did say was that providing for the research that may lead to such is a near-term product that can be marketed and sold, not only to business but to the financial community. Money can and should be made off proving the concepts.

Are there some that have been proven? Yes, and various companies are already pursuing some of them. Are there some things that could be manufactured on orbit even at current costs? According to some in industry, the answer may be yes, but more research is needed. Why not make money off the process and use it to drive investment by proving in the only fashion that truly matters that space can and should be commercialized?

Investors want proof. They want projections that are based on cold, hard facts, not dreams and idle speculation. Customers want products that serve an immediate need and do so at a reasonable price. If you want someone to try something new that they don’t know they need, you have to lead them to it.

Cheap shots, bigotry, and grandiose dreams won’t do that. What it will take is grand dreams that build on realistic steps that look at the needs of the customer and the investor. Otherwise, we are going to be stuck with NASA, and not even our grandchildren will reach the stars.

-30-

« ...howl's done

The fact is that space enthusiasts, and I count myself as one, tend to get caught up in the goal, the technology. It is the means of getting there, the specific projects that catch our eye and become the focus. The problem is, that focus is shared by no one else. No one else truly cares about the neat things we can do with a specific technology. Let’s face it: the really neat technology that can only come into play once we are in space is only of interest to a very small group. That is the problem.

Instead, it needs to be looked at from two distinct, but closely related, viewpoints. First, the customer. Second, the investor.

The customer should be the driver. What does the customer want? What can you sell the customer that they don’t yet know that they want or need? Michael makes some very good cases for this, and of finding incremental products to sell.

The latter ties into the second viewpoint that is crucial: the investor. The investor is looking for anything that helps guarantees a return on investment, and for ways to greatly increase that return. That means finding as many markets for each product and waste product as possible.

Yep, I said waste product. What is one person’s trash is another’s treasure and that will hold true in space as well. For years, people have tried to get NASA to leave the external tanks in orbit so they can be used. They not only have processed metals and chambers, but several tons of unused liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen on board. It actually costs NASA energy and money to dump them into the ocean, but for reasons (or lack thereof) known only to them, NASA has bitterly resisted doing so. A waste product, and a possible sale to another customer.

What is clearly needed in most of the commercial space community, particularly in the space enthusiasts community, is a change of outlook, a change of approach. The focus needs to be less on the technology or really neat thing, and on how that technology or thing can make money.

More on that later, maybe even tomorrow.

-30-

« ...howl's done

Hardware:
Cool, dark location

Ingredients
2-4 good quality vanilla Beans
1 750ml bottle of good vodka

The secret, to my mind, is to get a good quality vodka as a base. I went with Luksusowa potato vodka, but any brand will do. Place beans in vodka, I recommend starting with 2. Reseal bottle and put in a cool dark place for at least six weeks. Check at six weeks and it should be good. It will store for at least six months, and I am finding that it does last longer. I just pulled the beans from mine this morning to keep it from going bitter, but many don’t have this problem as it gets used up long before that point. I use mine for baking and a small dash goes into my oatmeal as it cooks on Sunday morning. Enjoy.

-30-

« ...howl's done