Some time off.
I will be taking some time off for the next two weeks. I'll resume posting on May 12, 2009.
OUR PRELIMINARY SPECIFICATION MAKES SHALE COMMERCIAL. THROUGH AN INNOVATIVE BUSINESS MODEL SUPPORTING THE JOINT OPERATING COMMITTEE, WE PROVIDE OIL AND GAS ASSETS WITH THE MOST PROFITABLE MEANS OF OIL AND GAS OPERATIONS, EVERYWHERE AND ALWAYS. ENABLING THEM TO ACHIEVE ACCOUNTABLE AND PROFITABLE NORTH AMERICAN ENERGY INDEPENDENCE. OIL AND GAS’ VALUE PROPOSITION IS AT A MINIMUM, LEVERAGED TO THE POINT OF 10,000 MAN HOURS PER BOE. WE KNOW WE CAN, AND WE KNOW HOW TO MAKE MONEY IN THIS BUSINESS.
I will be taking some time off for the next two weeks. I'll resume posting on May 12, 2009.
Posted by Paul Cox at 10:00 PM 0 comments
In an April 16, 2009 podcast on Bloomburg, Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz said;
... I think the depth of the problems remind us of how badly the system functioned before 2007. I mean I think this is the real lesson here, the lesson is not that we've had a little trauma today, the lesson is the system didn't work before the trauma, and it was the failures that were working before the trauma that have lead to the trauma.
Posted by Paul Cox at 10:29 PM 0 comments
Labels: Accountability, CISP, failure
It's important that I revisit the status of the project now and then for a quick update. Particularly for those that may have joined recently. As of today the Draft Specification has been reviewed by over 500 people. I consider this quite remarkable considering the topic of discussion, oil and gas systems is rather obscure. We are now just past 9 months from the point in time that I published the specification and the ideas inherent within are being broadcast across a very large community.
Posted by Paul Cox at 8:24 PM 0 comments
Labels: Collaboration, development, Specification, User
Yale University Professor Robert Shiller raises an interesting point in this video. Shiller is famous for the Case - Shiller housing index. And by the way, this is another McKinsey document, # 52 in a long list of top quality articles and commentary. The video and article are here, registration required, click on the title for the url.
The forces pushing to increase regulation today are potentially creating further difficulties down the road. The ability and desire to catch the Bernard Madoff and Conrad Blacks while their in the middle of planning their dirty deeds is a compelling justification. No one likes to see illegal acts being exercised on innocent victims. But are these crooks symptomatic of the entire marketplace? Or are they high profile and in the news because the Ponzi scheme could not be sold without cash.
Obama wants to completely redesign the marketplace. Good luck with that. I figure he is about 3 months away from being a mere shadow of a president. He doesn't have a clue about what it is that he is talking about, doesn't have ideas or foundation of which to build a new system on. Or the political capital to undertake such a task.
Professor Shiller notes many good points in the video presentation. Essentially laying a strong foundation that regulation is the anti-innovation. We don't need more rules to keep the criminals in-check. We need People, Ideas & Objects to make the energy industry keep the global economy fueled well into this century.
Professor Shiller makes the following comments supporting the work that is being done here at People, Ideas & Objects.
I think the government has to take an attitude that it is the sponsor of innovation, both of scientific innovation and of financial innovation. The government learned that years ago, just after World War II, when they created the National Science Foundation—and the government aggressively supports scientific innovation. We have to have the same attitude toward financial innovation.This project seeks to support and provide the earth sciences and engineering disciplines. I stated in my thesis that the industry needs to move away from the banking basis of predictable returns to a basis of innovation and science. That will not happen on its own, we need to be build the systems to support the organizations first. No software no organization.
I don’t want to see us killing off innovation, and this is what may get lost—and I hope it doesn’t get lost—in the current crisis. Ultimately, let’s not forget that we’ve learned lessons that a capitalist economy is an economy that promotes entrepreneurship, and entrepreneurship is not the province for government bureaucrats.Therefore we have to keep this project moving forward with an eye to ensuring that unnecessary regulation begins to influence the decisions that are made.
I don’t want to say that I don’t think there will be a turnaround soon, but I think that many of us are too much expecting that it might come tomorrow or the day after. And this volatility is evidence of that. So I think it is quite possible that the stock market and the housing market, five years from now, will be close to where they are now.Professor Shiller's timing seems accurate to me. Five years is also a good time for the community to have this software operational. Providing the innovation that the oil and gas industry needs for the next 25 years. I wonder what SAP and Oracle have in store for the industry?
Posted by Paul Cox at 11:48 PM 0 comments
Labels: CISP, Innovation, McKinsey
Google's new tool, the Google Insights for Search was highlighted yesterday. I was thinking all through the day what a tool like that would be like in the oil and gas industry. I felt as a result, I didn't attach enough emphasis on the implications of having the data available for the type of analysis that is available with the tools I described in the Draft Specification .
First lets go back to the situation at hand today. Data is scattered throughout the organization in a number of informal and unknown spreadsheets, databases and file cabinets. Their are production departments, accounting departments and exploration departments that use very similar data and store this data in their own file cabinets and electronically. As we know departments only speak to each other at the higher levels of the organizations. Hence the lack of communication and shared data remains an unfulfilled promise.
A lot of this data is not structured or captured in a centralized database. The advantage of using a database is that it allows different users to perceive the data in different ways. Much of this problem has been addressed by the various POSC and PPDM data models. However, not many of the software vendors or companies have been able to implement the data models in the optimal way. Consider also that polymorphic behavior which is a cornerstone of the Java Programming Language. Allows users to perceive different methods or ways of processing the data. You begin to see the flexibility and opportunity that is missing with these poor data implementations.
When we talk about the Security & Access Control Module in the People, Ideas & Objects we begin to see the importance of getting all of this data organized and accessible by the right people.
Imagine what it would be like if People were able to access the same data in the same format for the entire Joint Operating Committee. And this would apply to the entire industry. Where the employees and contractors that are authorized access to the data are all trained in the generic industry data models. Everyone would know where the data they need is, and would be able to access it from their clients in an authorized fashion and analyse it effectively for new information.
Lastly, the Technical Vision of People, ideas & Objects. Essentially laying out for the means to have an explosion of data in every corner of the producer's domain. This is not as a result of the application being built, this data will become real on its own. The tools to make it so are now readily available and a matter of time before its generally available. If the data is not organized today, when and how will it be organized in the future with exponentially more data, risk and complexity.
Technorati Tags: People's Data PPDM Specification Security
Posted by Paul Cox at 11:16 PM 0 comments
Labels: Data, PPDM, security, Specification
Google recently released a new service called Google Insights for Search. (Click on the title of this blog post to be taken to the announcement on the Google Research blog). Once you go to the site (http://www.google.com/insights/search/#) it will subsequently show up as an application in your Google Account. There is a related .pdf written by Hal Varian and Hyunyong Choi that details how to use this new and interesting tool.
In the Draft Specification we have two modules that are somewhat related to this product. Both the Analytics & Statistics Module and the Performance Evaluation Module are user defined tools that allow detailed analysis of the data in People, Ideas & Objects. The data is the key attribute to these modules. With the People, Ideas & Objects Technical Vision expecting the data volumes to explode through IPv6, Java and Wireless access to the data in a known format. Data analysis tools like Analytics & Statistics and Performance Evaluation Modules will be the key to obtaining value from it. That is essentially what Google has done with the Google Trends data, published it through a known API and interface.
The purpose in allowing users to access formatted data is the key to the value in using the tools and understanding the data. How many firms have data scattered across many departments and on individuals machine? How much of this data is available through known and trusted access mechanisms? What tools are available for people to interpret and analyze the data. We have the opportunity to embed the R application into the Modules and other opportunities.
I highly recommend downloading the R application, the .pdf from Google on how to use Google Insight for Search and Google Trends data. Experimentation with this opportunity will provide you with the beginning of understanding the opportunities we will make available to our users. And please, join me here .
Technorati Tags: People's Google Data Algorithms Learning
Posted by Paul Cox at 8:06 PM 0 comments
Labels: Algorithms, Data, Google, Learning
Calgary's Herald newspaper has an article in Thursday's issue that supports the many initiatives inherent in this software development project. My actions have been to convince the industry that the need is great for the delivery of an ERP styled application such as People, Ideas & Objects. This began in February 2003 with a proposal that dealt with the two significant constraints of any software developer, code and customers. In September 2003 I then proposed a comprehensive research proposal. This proposal would test my hypothesis of an ERP system that identifies and supports the Joint Operating Committee; would provide the producers with a more innovative footing.
All well and good but it was at this time the producers turned against any idea of using the JOC. Or so I thought. Throughout the months of 2003 my proposals were steadily moving up the chain of command of the large intermediate producers. Reaching most of the CEO's in these firms was a reflection of the effort and the scope of the idea. Or so I thought. The one comment that in retrospect resonates with me is the comment that "we don't hire small research firm's." When none of the producers were interested in spending any money on this idea, I decided to conduct the research my self at my own cost.
In March 2004 I was informed that my thesis was complete and passed. I then set out to rewrite the document in commercial form. This was completed in May 2004 as the "Preliminary Research Report." Upon publishing this I was approached by some one in the industry who gave me two documents from Cambridge Energy Research Associates. These research documents were obviously on the same track as I was on in establishing the JOC as the key organizational construct. Their problem was it was well behind my completed work. I therefore won the right to the copyrights of these ideas. This also brought to mind the comments about "not using small research firms". I concluded this was a deliberate attempt to steal what was now mine. Understand the proposal I made in September 2003 was to conduct the research. The intellectual property was to be for the industry as they would be the ones that financed it. And since I financed it, the IP was mine.
Nonetheless it was around this point that I knew I was now an outsider to this industry. Any attempt to find work became useless and frustrated. Resigning myself to this fact I sought employment in other businesses and industries. And began writing this blog. After over 600 entries and 700,000 words I have been able to take the initial concept of using the JOC and detailed the research and results of the Draft Specification. An overall vision of what the oil and gas industry would look like and operate as by using the JOC.
I mention this bit of history as the basic need for People, Ideas & Objects was evident in the difficulties of finding and producing oil and gas. Finding energy was becoming substantially more difficult. Instead of developing these ideas and applications the industry chose to remove me and my ideas from the marketplace. Instead of doing anything constructive the industry has done nothing about their business but line their pockets with inappropriate levels of compensation.
That is a strong indictment of the brain trust of the Canadian oil and gas industry and particularly its management. And today we see the evidence that they are challenged by the difficulties in finding and producing oil and gas. From the Calgary Herald article.
Natural gas makes up two-thirds of all activity in the oilpatch and production has fallen almost 15 per cent over the past two years, taking the biggest contributor to the government’s revenue stream down with it. From a peak of about 14 billion cubic feet a day in 2001, Alberta’s gas production has steadily slid to a little more than 12 billion cubic feet at present. That figure is widely expected to fall as much as a billion cubic feet a day in 2009 as a result of spending cutbacks by big producers such as EnCana Corp. and Canadian Natural Resources Ltd., which are the two biggest drillers in the province.It is important to remember that it was during this past two years that record activity in the field was taking place. More money was spent then in any prior period, and a 15% decline is the result? If doing all that activity lead to a significant decline in production what will doing nothing bring?
Herring was poring over numbers that showed only seven per cent of available rigs were drilling in Alberta.Now granted some of that activity is attributable to road bans. But nonetheless budget cuts have been deep and systemic through out the producers involved in Alberta. In order to resolve this the solution that is suggested is;
The only way to increase production is to punch more wells to offset declines, said Don Herring, president of the Canadian Association of Oilwell Drilling Contractors.The only way? Doing more of the same thing, expecting different results reflects a mental disability, not a solution.
Posted by Paul Cox at 8:26 PM 0 comments
Labels: Call to action, Energy, failure, Management
Using a hockey analogy to reflect the opposing team is indulging in inappropriate or unfair play. It's also an analogy that will be intimately understood by Sun Microsystems Chairman Scott McNeally. I'm speaking of the actions of IBM in this proposed acquisition of Sun.
Posted by Paul Cox at 9:06 PM 0 comments
"Personal Urban Mobility & Accessibility" from GM and Segway. What have they done to my Segway? I have frequently pointed to the need to stop hurling 4,000 pounds down the highway at 60 miles per hour. As one solution to the many energy demand issues. We can't afford to be spending so much energy so inefficiently. If you believe in global warming, then you should also get behind this type of transportation. Using it to replace the car in your daily commute. And relegating the car to one or two days per week.
It'll be one-quarter the cost per mile, he told journalists. This is a vehicle that runs on electricity made from a wide range of sources, and because it's so small, it's efficient--it's approaching 150- or 200-gallon [tank] efficiency.
Posted by Paul Cox at 9:57 PM 0 comments
Professor Vernon Smith is a Nobel Laureate with an article in today's Wall Street Journal. His analysis rely' on the qualitative, and this article doesn't disappoint. Two comments that stand out, and that show the economic situation we are in is unique and historical. Relating the current experience to the great depression, he writes.
Had the mounting difficulties of the banks and the final collapse of the banking system in the "Bank Holiday" in March 1933 been caused by contraction of the money supply, as Milton Friedman and Anna Schwartz argued, then the massive injections of liquidity over the past 18 months should have averted the collapse of the financial market during this current crisis.
The causes of the Great Depression need more study, but the claims that losses on stock-market speculation and a monetary contraction caused the decline of the banking system both seem inadequate. It appears that both the Great Depression and the current crisis had their origins in excessive consumer debt -- especially mortgage debt -- that was transmitted into the financial sector during a sharp downturn.
Posted by Paul Cox at 10:07 PM 0 comments
Professor James Hamilton writes the popular and often cited weblog www.econombrowser.com. (Click on the title to download this paper.) I have highlighted many of his writing in the left hand column of this blog, his writing is clear, comprehensive and based on fact. Through the Brookings Institute he has published a paper entitled "Causes and Consequences of the Oil Shock 2007 - 2008". The abstract to this paper reads;
This paper explores similarities and differences between the run-up of oil prices in 2007-08 and earlier oil price shocks, looking at what caused the price increase and what effects it had on the economy. Whereas historical oil price shocks were primarily caused by physical disruptions of supply, the price run-up of 2007-08 was caused by strong demand confronting stagnating world production. Although the causes were different, the consequences for the economy appear to have been very similar to those observed in earlier episodes, with significant effects on overall consumption spending and purchases of domestic automobiles in particular. In the absence of those declines, it is unlikely that we would have characterized the period 2007:Q4 to 2008:Q3 as one of economic recession for the U.S. The experience of 2007-08 should thus be added to the list of recessions to which oil prices appear to have made a material contribution.I recommend people download and review the comprehensive nature of this paper. This is an individual who, with tenure at the University of San Diego, and an impressive global following has nothing to gain or lose by saying what is said. This is the first paper that I have seen that confirms the concern that all should have with respect to our energy demands.
The most important principle for understanding short-run changes in the price of oil is the fact that income rather than price is the key determinant of the quantity demanded. p. 1In a related item Bloomburg is reporting that many of the difficulties the major producers are having in increasing their production profiles. It sounds to me they need a new more innovative organizational construct supported by a capability based software developer. Please join me here.
There are a number of articles pointing to what I feel is the big problem that we face. The energy problems that we were dealing with last year seem somewhat distant. It appears there is a general consensus that the high energy prices were a result of market manipulation. Nothing could be further from the truth. Energy issues are being forgotten and obscured by our current economic condition.
It's therefore pleasing to see that many organizations are discussing what I feel is the big problem that we face. McKinsey Global Institute have published a series of articles about energy and do a good job in laying down the basics of the problems. Their articles are part of a series "Averting the next energy crisis: the demand challenge".
The same message is being articulated by Daniel Yergin and his Cambridge Energy Research Associates. Suggesting there is a destruction in our capabilities in terms of energy production. Although I consider CERA's projections to be far too optimistic. Even they are suggesting a loss of up to 7.6 million barrels of oil per day will be lost as a result of the decline in capital spending. Matthew Simmons of Simmons Consulting captures the point in the following article .
The global financial crisis and collapse in the oil market have stalled vital investment in oil exploration and production and are likely soon to lead to a sharp spike in prices, an energy consultant and financier says.The economic conditions continue to deteriorate and will do so for some time. The Economist is stating that "Trade is Collapsing Everywhere" showing the unique size and scope of the problem. Expecting that the economy will be able to be stimulated back to its previously un-sustainable level, is wrong. We need to be focused on the issues that we can solve. The energy problem being the most important.
Posted by Paul Cox at 10:25 PM 0 comments
Labels: development, Economics, Simmons, Yergin
I found this article on the dzone.com web log, click on the title of this entry to be taken to the article. It is a reprint or summary of a book about Service Oriented Architectures (SOA). It has an interesting point of view regarding the changes that are occurring due to what they call the "virtual service grid technology". The conclusion states;
The changes brought by virtual service grid technology will likely transform the information industry in ways that are difficult to fathom from our present day vantage point. We are essentially at an inflection point defined by two forces: the transition from an up front investment model for IT requiring large capital outlays to a pay-as-you-go model. Market elasticity dictates that when price points go down, demand increases, partly due to pent-up needs, but perhaps more so because new entrants enter the field who could not afford to play before. This means increasing participation by the members of the "long tail" of cloud computing: small businesses, emerging markets and even individuals coming up with a great idea.
Second, the acceleration of the time it takes to build an application by orders of magnitude means the evolutionary process gets accelerated by the same rate. The evolutionary refinement of hundreds of generations taking place in the same time it took to develop a traditional application is mind boggling. (See also 1 , 2)
MIT has released a video of Professor Martin Feldstein and Simon Johnson from February 11, 2009. (Click on the title of this entry.) Feldstein is the former and long time president of the National Bureau of Economic Research where he was responsible for defining the time frame of when a recession occurred. He is also a Professor at Harvard and a frequent speaker in many of the conferences and forums where ideas, problems and solutions are discussed. Simon Johnson is an MIT Professor and former Chief Economist at the International Monetary Fund. He is also an author of an excellent blog that can be sourced here.
Many of the newspapers have been sporting a series of ads from IBM. The first of these is "A mandate for change is a mandate for smart." You know that a trend is well ingrained when the large suppliers are on board. With their recent announcement to purchase Sun Microsystems and being on the same song page that we are, there may be hope for their future.
Right now - today - leaders of businesses and governments everywhere have a unique opportunity to transform the way the world works.
First, the world is becoming instrumented. Imagine, if you can, almost a billion transistors for every human being. Sensors are being embedded everywhere: in cars, appliances, cameras, roads, pipelines... even in medicine and livestock.
Second the world is becoming interconnected. Like people, systems and objects can now "speak" to each other, producing oceans of data.
Third, all of those instrumented and interconnected things are becoming intelligent. They are being linked to powerful new back-end systems that can process all that data, and to advanced analytics capable of turning it into real insight, in real time.
Posted by Paul Cox at 10:12 PM 0 comments
Another Strategy + Business article talking about the impact of Information Technologies on organizations success. (Click on the title of this entry) This "Leading Ideas" article is subtitled;
For many companies, success in the next decade will depend on how well they implement information technologies that transform when and how people do their jobs.People, Ideas & Objects falls well within the scope of this article. The work force is changing, mostly as a result of the changes driven by the current poor economy. I would expect that this economic trend will be augmented and supported by further calls to change driven by IT. This article provides us with an understanding of the scope of the challenge that is in front of us.
If business decentralization is a long-running trend with more stutter-steps than successes, it’s primarily because the technology to make decentralization work deftly has yet to be perfected or adopted by skittish organizations unwilling to fully take a chance on the unproven. But by 2020, innovative competitors — and inevitable gains in remote, mobile, and virtual devices — will make it impossible for most companies to deny that information technology is profoundly reshaping the workplace. By then, in many businesses, workers will no longer be bound by geography or by clocks.First off the understanding that an innovative mindset is to try many things and discover many of the reasons that it won't work. These will be applied in this development process and enable us to approach this challenge constructively. This applies to the oil and gas industry and specifically to the earth scientists and engineers that will / are finding their volume of work growing.
The blended workforce. Over the next decade many employees won’t be employees at all; they will be temporaries, contractors, contingent workers, outsourced workers, freelancers, and, in business-to-business transactions, customers. Today, there are more than 42 million independent workers in the United States, or about 31 percent of the workforce.The trend is well on its way and unstoppable. This is more of a quality of life issue with respect to the workers within the various industries. It should be asked how the oil and gas industry, already challenged with, a shortage of workers, retirements, increased workload per barrel of oil and gas and now competition on a worker quality of life issues. Good luck trying to hire people who are expected to use SAP or other bureaucratic supporting systems. But then again, I am biased. This trend will also bring new issues into play.
With outsourcing sure to be even more common in the future, managers will have to pay attention to project hand-offs and coordination costs between partners.Something that should be considered is the specification and design of the People, Ideas & Objects application modules.
To keep their blended workforce happy, they will also need to create interesting work in an engaging workplace and pay workers’ invoices on time or risk exacerbating turnover, creating yet another fissure through which knowledge can drain.As I indicated yesterday, the oil and gas producers have much to gain in getting involved in People, Ideas & Objects. Progress is being made on a day to day basis in Internet time. That is to say the accelerated pace of change of the Internet is the time table this project is following. I'd like to think the producers are progressive enough to start pulling some of the weight of this project.
Posted by Paul Cox at 11:30 PM 0 comments
Labels: Call to action, development, Funding, Trends
Posted by Paul Cox at 9:41 PM 0 comments
Labels: Call to action, Community, Funding, Governance
We see a bid being made on Sun Microsystems by IBM. Sun is our key vendor, and as a software developer they are the key to our technology stack. Java, JavaFX, GlassFish, Solaris, NetBeans, MySQL, and SPARC to name just a few of the more important ones. In addition to the products, there are the research and development capabilities which brought about these technologies. Other then Apple, no other firm, in my opinion, has the diversity and completeness of product and service offering. I would include IBM in that comparison.
Posted by Paul Cox at 8:58 PM 0 comments
Labels: Economics, Open Source, Sun
It would be no surprise that I subscribe to Jonathon Schwartz' web log. The CEO blogger from Sun Microsystems. Jonathon is way out there in terms of his devotion to open source. And is the reason that Sun has opened most of their software openings. He has undertaken to write a series of blog posts on the methods that Sun is using to commercialize their open source offerings and how it sells hardware. Moving to the video format might not really work for him, you can view the three posts here, here and here, I would recommend that you subscibe to his blog here.
Posted by Paul Cox at 9:46 PM 0 comments
Labels: development, Open Source, Sun, Value-Proposition
There is a video presentation of Tim Berners-Lee at the TED Conference in February 2009. (Click on the title of this entry for the video.) In the video he discusses his actions and concerns regarding his development of the World Wide Web. Many have claimed, including vice - president Al Gore, to have invented the web, but only Tim Berners Lee is recognized as doing so. Nighted by the Queen, Sir Berners-Lee notes in this video that the web will soon be 20 years of age, and that indeed it was recognized on Saturday March 14, 2009.
Posted by Paul Cox at 1:48 PM 0 comments
Labels: Data, Science, Specification
It is increasingly clear that the current downturn is fundamentally different from recessions of recent decades. We are experiencing not merely another turn of the business cycle, but a restructuring of the economic order.
The question is, “What will normal look like?” While no one can say how long the crisis will last, what we find on the other side will not look like the normal of recent years. The new normal will be shaped by a confluence of powerful forces—some arising directly from the financial crisis and some that were at work long before it began.
For some organizations, near-term survival is the only agenda item. Others are peering through the fog of uncertainty, thinking about how to position themselves once the crisis has passed and things return to normal. The question is, “What will normal look like?” While no one can say how long the crisis will last, what we find on the other side will not look like the normal of recent years. The new normal will be shaped by a confluence of powerful forces—some arising directly from the financial crisis and some that were at work long before it began.
Either way, the reality is that around the world governments will be calling the shots in sectors (such as debt insurance) that were once only lightly regulated. They will also be demanding new levels of transparency and disclosure for investment vehicles such as hedge funds and getting involved in decisions that were once the sole province of corporate boards, including executive compensation.
Through it all, technological innovation will continue, and the value of increasing human knowledge will remain undiminished. For talented contrarians and technologists, the next few years may prove especially fruitful as investors looking for high-risk, high-reward opportunities shift their attention from financial engineering to genetic engineering, software, and clean energy.The richness of the possibilities is available to those that join People, Ideas & Objects. Please join me here.
This much is certain: when we finally enter into the post-crisis period, the business and economic context will not have returned to its pre-crisis state. Executives preparing their organizations to succeed in the new normal must focus on what has changed and what remains basically the same for their customers, companies, and industries. The result will be an environment that, while different from the past, is no less rich in possibilities for those who are prepared.
Posted by Paul Cox at 10:05 PM 0 comments
In an Op-Ed by Thomas Friedman in the New York Times entitled The Inflection Is Near? Friedman asks if the economy is undergoing a fundamental change.
What if the crisis of 2008 represents something much more fundamental than a deep recession? What if it’s telling us that the whole growth model we created over the last 50 years is simply unsustainable economically and ecologically and that 2008 was when we hit the wall — when Mother Nature and the market both said: “No more.”
Posted by Paul Cox at 12:05 AM 0 comments
Labels: Economics, Innovation, Romer, Trends
Posted by Paul Cox at 12:01 AM 0 comments
Labels: security, Specification, Sun
Reid Hoffman is on Charlie Rose talking about his company LinkedIn. Its not surprising that I just highlighted the LinkedIn service on Tuesday's blog post. This is a must view video, and keep in mind that everyone is an entrepreneur, entrepreneurs work in communities and People, Ideas & Objects is the community for those people that work in oil and gas. Please join me here.
Technorati Tags: People's Entrepreneurial Community Video
Posted by Paul Cox at 10:19 PM 0 comments
Labels: Community, Entrepreneurial, Video
Posted by Paul Cox at 12:05 AM 0 comments
Labels: Governance, Innovation, Military Command, organization