So it’s been awhile since I had a chance to blog. But the last time my topic was on scams and conmen. But I realize when I woke up this morning that the last 12 months have literally bookended with finding out that one man had been taking credit for my inventions and another is trying to take credit for my research. In between, I’ve lost count of how many times this year people have taken credit for my work or improperly tried to attach my name to theirs.
It seems so strange but I realize that this is very common place. So I ask: Are people intrinsically dishonest, or do they actually believe they contributed?
If two men see a sign fall off a wall. Man #1 says “They should make a bracket that hold better.” Man #2 seems to say something like “I was just thinking that.”
In my experience Man #2, really thinks: “I thought of that before he said it…” And therefore man #2 believes it is really his idea.
So then, if man #1 then invents the better bracket man #2 either thinks “he sole my idea” or believe he’s the co-inventor and somehow deserves a share of the profits.
Now I have found it doesn’t matter if man #2 has the ability to design a bracket or even the desire to attempt to do so. He still feels that he is some how responsible. And usually he thinks he is the main person responsible so that the invention would not be with out him.
So I have decided that today’s rant is directed at all of the man #2’s out there. Seeing a need is not inventing. Wanting to research is not the same as doing research. And most importantly, knowing the inventor does not entitle you to equal credit.
But I think this part of a more global problem. We went from the little engine that though it could to telling people they want to be so they are. You can call yourself a poet if you string some words together with a few expletives. A painter because you splash some color on a canvas. But we ignore that these disciplines take training. Title mean nothing. You can be what ever you want just because you want… weather or not you are actually trained.
We have been so burdened worrying about everyone’s self-esteem that we no longer tell anyone they are wrong or make them do what they should. As a result we have people who actually think they are poets, painters and inventors, simply because they want to be.
So in the name of science, art and the sphere of knowledge in general let me say that everything worth doing requires effort. You must strive to learn and study and be the best you can.
I’ll pick this up later… Next up: Saints, Beer and hard work…
Monday, September 19, 2011
Thursday, September 8, 2011
Honest deals stand scrutiny
I’m slipping. A proposal came in and I couldn’t figure out the scam. I knew it was something, but couldn’t see it. Looked like a perfectly legit offer to buy as part of a government initiative. So I blew up the attached government document. And the official seal was cut pasted to the document. Had to do a 5x blow up - but it’s out of focus to the rest of the document at that level. So it was scanned or photographed and imported. Not printed and not from an original image file.
But as I say I am slipping, the telephone exchange is form Togo… should have seen that right away. Well anyway, it’s not a sale but at least I seem to have another conman to play with for awhile. It’s like finding a toy in the cereal box.
Except that I’m too busy to play with the conmen today. I have real dealers and customers to contact. So it’s like finding a toy and having your mother put it on the counter until you’re done with your homework.
None the less, I responded and asked for some proof of validity. A contact at the government agency... something. And I got a fairly rude response: “If you are interested to secure and execute the contract, you then comply. How ever, if you are not interested, you then decline.”
Rude conmen? Really that’s just lazy. I mean come on. Woo me a little. Sigh… no one wants to put the effort in anymore. At least the folks working the “lost dog” scam a few months ago had some pride in their work.
For those of you who are not familiar with the lost dog scam, it goes like this. Man and his dog (actually usually a stray) go into a bar or coffee shop or something and he asks… the man not the dog… if he can leave the dog for a while as he has a job interview and he has no where to leave the dog. He’s homeless, unemployed (again the man not the dog) or something like that and desperate. He can’t blow the interview.
So he leaves the dog. Then some one else comes in and sees the dog and asks if it’s for sale. It’s rare for breeding, the perfect look for a commercial… something.
The barman or barista will say they are just watching it so the stranger leaves their number and says “Have the owner call me I’ll pay x (where x is sufficiently large) dollars for this dog.”
Now at this point the honest person tells the down and outer… who by the way hasn’t gotten the job… that someone offered to buy his dog. The unscrupulous mark offers to but the dog himself. Of course for considerably less than x.
The man takes the money and when the mark calls the number he finds it isn’t real. It’s a nice scam … only works if the mark is scum willing to kick some one already down. You know the old saying may be wrong. You can cheat an honest man. But it’s much harder than cheating a crook.
Ok, that’s the classic. The modern variant is really not much different. A company calls looking for a chemical they need for say oil pipe line cleaning. They say that their vendor is overcharging them at $2.25 per pound for the several million pounds they need, because they know profits of the oil companies are high. So the want an agent who will keep a low profile and strike the deal at a fair price which they feel us $1.89 a pound.
Well, you look up the chemical and you find three companies (all set up in the last thirty days… if you bother to check) all selling this chemical for $0.93 per pound. So the honest agent arranges the deal and takes his commission. … actually he waits for a commission that never comes but at least he’s out nothing.
But the shiftier “business man” buys the stuff himself at $0.93 and sells it to his “client” for $1.89.
Except that the “client” pays on 90 days, while the domestic dealer requires payment at 40 days. So the mark has to pony up large sums of cash based on an invoice that will never be paid.
But they really put some effort into it. The chemical is a trade name… that they took the time to register… it really sells for $0.11 per pound. So no matter how much is bought, they can really sell the actual material which keeps the police out of it until the money paid to the domestic dealer is long gone. Real low value material changes hands – and usually lands at the marks warehouse. So they can sell it and recoup some of their investment. But the international contract falls through. Their payment doesn’t clear escrow.
The domestic dealers all disappear before the 90 days. And yes there are false identities and lots of fraud. But nothing actionable until it’s too late.
The honest company does due diligence and fairly represents their client, and doesn’t get stung because they don’t buy anything. Even the dishonest company with good business practices gets away unscathed because they research their vendors and the chemical.
This, like the original lost dog scam only targets the dishonest. And more importantly they put a lot of thought into the set up. They wooed their targets. Not like the rude man from Togo who wanted no doubt a quick and dirty over invoice scam. Sigh… just no pride in craftsmanship.
Still the lesson here is to always check out all aspects of customers and vendors. Know what you’re buying and selling. Honest deals are virtually never “decide right now” situations. Honest deals stand scrutiny. Honest business partners don’t mind providing proof.
And of course remember to forward the scam to the proper authorities. Their job is easier if they can get in front of the scam rather than follow after.
Until later
Charles
But as I say I am slipping, the telephone exchange is form Togo… should have seen that right away. Well anyway, it’s not a sale but at least I seem to have another conman to play with for awhile. It’s like finding a toy in the cereal box.
Except that I’m too busy to play with the conmen today. I have real dealers and customers to contact. So it’s like finding a toy and having your mother put it on the counter until you’re done with your homework.
None the less, I responded and asked for some proof of validity. A contact at the government agency... something. And I got a fairly rude response: “If you are interested to secure and execute the contract, you then comply. How ever, if you are not interested, you then decline.”
Rude conmen? Really that’s just lazy. I mean come on. Woo me a little. Sigh… no one wants to put the effort in anymore. At least the folks working the “lost dog” scam a few months ago had some pride in their work.
For those of you who are not familiar with the lost dog scam, it goes like this. Man and his dog (actually usually a stray) go into a bar or coffee shop or something and he asks… the man not the dog… if he can leave the dog for a while as he has a job interview and he has no where to leave the dog. He’s homeless, unemployed (again the man not the dog) or something like that and desperate. He can’t blow the interview.
So he leaves the dog. Then some one else comes in and sees the dog and asks if it’s for sale. It’s rare for breeding, the perfect look for a commercial… something.
The barman or barista will say they are just watching it so the stranger leaves their number and says “Have the owner call me I’ll pay x (where x is sufficiently large) dollars for this dog.”
Now at this point the honest person tells the down and outer… who by the way hasn’t gotten the job… that someone offered to buy his dog. The unscrupulous mark offers to but the dog himself. Of course for considerably less than x.
The man takes the money and when the mark calls the number he finds it isn’t real. It’s a nice scam … only works if the mark is scum willing to kick some one already down. You know the old saying may be wrong. You can cheat an honest man. But it’s much harder than cheating a crook.
Ok, that’s the classic. The modern variant is really not much different. A company calls looking for a chemical they need for say oil pipe line cleaning. They say that their vendor is overcharging them at $2.25 per pound for the several million pounds they need, because they know profits of the oil companies are high. So the want an agent who will keep a low profile and strike the deal at a fair price which they feel us $1.89 a pound.
Well, you look up the chemical and you find three companies (all set up in the last thirty days… if you bother to check) all selling this chemical for $0.93 per pound. So the honest agent arranges the deal and takes his commission. … actually he waits for a commission that never comes but at least he’s out nothing.
But the shiftier “business man” buys the stuff himself at $0.93 and sells it to his “client” for $1.89.
Except that the “client” pays on 90 days, while the domestic dealer requires payment at 40 days. So the mark has to pony up large sums of cash based on an invoice that will never be paid.
But they really put some effort into it. The chemical is a trade name… that they took the time to register… it really sells for $0.11 per pound. So no matter how much is bought, they can really sell the actual material which keeps the police out of it until the money paid to the domestic dealer is long gone. Real low value material changes hands – and usually lands at the marks warehouse. So they can sell it and recoup some of their investment. But the international contract falls through. Their payment doesn’t clear escrow.
The domestic dealers all disappear before the 90 days. And yes there are false identities and lots of fraud. But nothing actionable until it’s too late.
The honest company does due diligence and fairly represents their client, and doesn’t get stung because they don’t buy anything. Even the dishonest company with good business practices gets away unscathed because they research their vendors and the chemical.
This, like the original lost dog scam only targets the dishonest. And more importantly they put a lot of thought into the set up. They wooed their targets. Not like the rude man from Togo who wanted no doubt a quick and dirty over invoice scam. Sigh… just no pride in craftsmanship.
Still the lesson here is to always check out all aspects of customers and vendors. Know what you’re buying and selling. Honest deals are virtually never “decide right now” situations. Honest deals stand scrutiny. Honest business partners don’t mind providing proof.
And of course remember to forward the scam to the proper authorities. Their job is easier if they can get in front of the scam rather than follow after.
Until later
Charles
Friday, September 2, 2011
New Song
Last week I went to hear Dan Navarro and a small venue in the north suburbs. I’ll refrain from commenting one whether I thought he was better or worse without Lowen, but I’ll say that it was frankly a great show.
And is typical after really good music, I found myself up all night with my own guitar writing a song. A good one I think. Uplifting. I’m writing it for a band I haven’t met and we’ll see what happens.
But, I mention it because music is what cleanses my pallet. I spend a lot of time with my research and inventions. And music just helps me re-center. And I think that’s a critical part of science.
In fact most of the really great scientists and inventors I have known have been musicians or artist as well. Or both. But all had all parts of their mind fed: creative, analytical, philosophical.
I don’t think it’s important that we be great at everything we do. But I think if we are going to be great at anything we need to do a lot. You cannot create without experiences.
Preston’s World would not exist if I hadn’t worked at drug stores as a teenager. Blue Blood Tracker would not exist if John Fischer wasn’t a hunter in addition to being forensic analyst. And don’t get me started on my songs.
That’s about all I have to say this morning. Oh yea… one more thing I actually wrote the important lines of the new song at the concert itself. So let me just thank Mr. Navarro now.
Until Later
Charles
And is typical after really good music, I found myself up all night with my own guitar writing a song. A good one I think. Uplifting. I’m writing it for a band I haven’t met and we’ll see what happens.
But, I mention it because music is what cleanses my pallet. I spend a lot of time with my research and inventions. And music just helps me re-center. And I think that’s a critical part of science.
In fact most of the really great scientists and inventors I have known have been musicians or artist as well. Or both. But all had all parts of their mind fed: creative, analytical, philosophical.
I don’t think it’s important that we be great at everything we do. But I think if we are going to be great at anything we need to do a lot. You cannot create without experiences.
Preston’s World would not exist if I hadn’t worked at drug stores as a teenager. Blue Blood Tracker would not exist if John Fischer wasn’t a hunter in addition to being forensic analyst. And don’t get me started on my songs.
That’s about all I have to say this morning. Oh yea… one more thing I actually wrote the important lines of the new song at the concert itself. So let me just thank Mr. Navarro now.
Until Later
Charles
Wednesday, August 24, 2011
The Electronic Age
So today I’m dealing with support issues like call forwarding, email and twitter. For some reason my smart phone forgot how to send email from my business account. What’s worse, is it was pretending to. I thought I was responding to clients who were getting nothing.
I finally got that fixed and went to head out to the post office and found my office phone wouldn’t forward. It seems that AT&T decided to “improve” my service by deleting that feature. After 45 minutes on line and on the phone I am told that it will take 24-48 hours for the service to be restored.
I am old enough to remember when an answering machine you could access remotely was a luxury. Now people expect responses real-time. For the self employed and small business this is problem made far worse by fritzy service providers.
So I am taking bets on what will get screwed up adding the call forwarding back in.
Anyway with that I’m going dark for awhile and heading to the post office.
Until Later
Charles
I finally got that fixed and went to head out to the post office and found my office phone wouldn’t forward. It seems that AT&T decided to “improve” my service by deleting that feature. After 45 minutes on line and on the phone I am told that it will take 24-48 hours for the service to be restored.
I am old enough to remember when an answering machine you could access remotely was a luxury. Now people expect responses real-time. For the self employed and small business this is problem made far worse by fritzy service providers.
So I am taking bets on what will get screwed up adding the call forwarding back in.
Anyway with that I’m going dark for awhile and heading to the post office.
Until Later
Charles
Thursday, August 18, 2011
The Value of a Product is in the Execution
I like doing research and inventing new products is fun. But the job of actually commercializing them is, …well… work. It’s a reality I think most people don’t realize. In fact I can’t tell you how many people I’ve met who think the idea alone is worth the lion’s share of the profit. T’aint true.
Without the knowledge to actually take a vague concept and make it real, the idea is essentially worthless. And more importantly the financial rewards follow the financial risk. And it is a lot of work to actually bring a product to market. Very few ideas start a stampede of marketers and investors.
This is all very real to me as I am now starting to get the first orders for the new forensic products launched last week. John pointed out that we’ve been working on this launch for more or less two years.
Granted we were not doing it full time. We both have had to support ourselves. And we’ve both been working on multiple products. In fact, I’m involved in the launch of thirty-one products this summer. That’s everything from product design, to setting up production, to strategizing marketing and arranging product fulfillment. And this has been while working on six pieces of raw research and running my regular consulting practice.
But all of this brings me up to sales, the piece I enjoy the least. But when I look at everything that has gone into these first sales, I have to say, the “Idea” may have been a good one, but it’s the execution that adds the value.
Until Later
Charles
Without the knowledge to actually take a vague concept and make it real, the idea is essentially worthless. And more importantly the financial rewards follow the financial risk. And it is a lot of work to actually bring a product to market. Very few ideas start a stampede of marketers and investors.
This is all very real to me as I am now starting to get the first orders for the new forensic products launched last week. John pointed out that we’ve been working on this launch for more or less two years.
Granted we were not doing it full time. We both have had to support ourselves. And we’ve both been working on multiple products. In fact, I’m involved in the launch of thirty-one products this summer. That’s everything from product design, to setting up production, to strategizing marketing and arranging product fulfillment. And this has been while working on six pieces of raw research and running my regular consulting practice.
But all of this brings me up to sales, the piece I enjoy the least. But when I look at everything that has gone into these first sales, I have to say, the “Idea” may have been a good one, but it’s the execution that adds the value.
Until Later
Charles
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
Art and Science
Two years ago I was at an art fair in the park. One of the booths was from shop calling itself “fine art.” And not to say that the painting sin the tent were unpleasant, but I couldn’t tell what the painter was trying to say. So I asked.
The painter (and I’ll avoid the term artist) She said that she likes to let the viewer find their own meaning. This is not art. It may be a pretty image. But art needs something to say. It has to emote, or tell. Fine art, conveys a idea that the viewer understands; the better the artist the clearer the telling.
I see this as a common element in society. Would be writers string random words together, add some vulgarity and call it poetry. We went from the little engine that “thought it could” to “I want to be so I am.” And with it we loose meaning. Art, science, law, morality are all victims to this decline of meaning.
Consider the “true arte,” swordsmanship. Not a fine art to be sure, but a skill that requires training and deliberacy of intent. One cannot be a good swordsman without active training and skill. The same is true of painting, writing, sculpture … and the list goes on.
And before one gets the impression that fine art is trivial, therefore it doesn’t matter if it looses meaning and significance, I would ask that the impact of the artist’s eye be considered. Which brings me to the tie in to this blog.
In the course of my scientific career I have had the opportunity to work with some great product designers, researchers and criminalists. On the surface, it is tempting to say that the crossover is in the aesthetic. But it goes beyond that. Art and science are both about definition. They seek, among other things to answer the question what. And it is here that they cross over. And it is here that the sloppy impression of “fine art” is hurting the whole of society.
As a scientist, I have been able to hold my own with the top minds in many fields. I am by no means claiming the same skill or knowledge as men and women with decades more training and experience. But, I could understand what they did and how they did it well enough to follow or reproduce what they did.
Some of them follow an Aristotelian approach to definition. Others took a more conciliate approach. And some just compare to what they already know. But there is another way to define a scene.
One criminalist’s approach was different. He looked at a crime scene aesthetically. What should or should not be there was the discriminating factor in how he searched. Unlike most of his peers, he was an artist not a scientist, a Flemish Realist painter. And I came to believe that his approach was much more indicative, of his painting than an outward in definition.
More importantly, unlike most of the experts I had worked with over the years, I could not reproduce what he did. So, I decided to try and learn to think like a painter, add this to my tool box.
So, I have been trying to teach myself to paint. Start with the outline, build the shadow, then add the detail layer by layer. So of the detail in one layer will be hidden by subsequent layers, but they are still important as in some way they will shape and shade the final image.
This way of defining is different from my normal analytical approach. As a scientist, I think from general to specific and this was going from specific to general. But it in building an image this way, I found that I was getting as sense of what should be there. And by extrapolation, what should not.
I may never be a good painter, but the exercise has taught me a new perspective and isn’t that kinda the point?
Peace
Charles
p.s. If you want to see some of the paintings: http://www.prestons-world.com/abouttheauthor/artgallery.html
The painter (and I’ll avoid the term artist) She said that she likes to let the viewer find their own meaning. This is not art. It may be a pretty image. But art needs something to say. It has to emote, or tell. Fine art, conveys a idea that the viewer understands; the better the artist the clearer the telling.
I see this as a common element in society. Would be writers string random words together, add some vulgarity and call it poetry. We went from the little engine that “thought it could” to “I want to be so I am.” And with it we loose meaning. Art, science, law, morality are all victims to this decline of meaning.
Consider the “true arte,” swordsmanship. Not a fine art to be sure, but a skill that requires training and deliberacy of intent. One cannot be a good swordsman without active training and skill. The same is true of painting, writing, sculpture … and the list goes on.
And before one gets the impression that fine art is trivial, therefore it doesn’t matter if it looses meaning and significance, I would ask that the impact of the artist’s eye be considered. Which brings me to the tie in to this blog.
In the course of my scientific career I have had the opportunity to work with some great product designers, researchers and criminalists. On the surface, it is tempting to say that the crossover is in the aesthetic. But it goes beyond that. Art and science are both about definition. They seek, among other things to answer the question what. And it is here that they cross over. And it is here that the sloppy impression of “fine art” is hurting the whole of society.
As a scientist, I have been able to hold my own with the top minds in many fields. I am by no means claiming the same skill or knowledge as men and women with decades more training and experience. But, I could understand what they did and how they did it well enough to follow or reproduce what they did.
Some of them follow an Aristotelian approach to definition. Others took a more conciliate approach. And some just compare to what they already know. But there is another way to define a scene.
One criminalist’s approach was different. He looked at a crime scene aesthetically. What should or should not be there was the discriminating factor in how he searched. Unlike most of his peers, he was an artist not a scientist, a Flemish Realist painter. And I came to believe that his approach was much more indicative, of his painting than an outward in definition.
More importantly, unlike most of the experts I had worked with over the years, I could not reproduce what he did. So, I decided to try and learn to think like a painter, add this to my tool box.
So, I have been trying to teach myself to paint. Start with the outline, build the shadow, then add the detail layer by layer. So of the detail in one layer will be hidden by subsequent layers, but they are still important as in some way they will shape and shade the final image.
This way of defining is different from my normal analytical approach. As a scientist, I think from general to specific and this was going from specific to general. But it in building an image this way, I found that I was getting as sense of what should be there. And by extrapolation, what should not.
I may never be a good painter, but the exercise has taught me a new perspective and isn’t that kinda the point?
Peace
Charles
p.s. If you want to see some of the paintings: http://www.prestons-world.com/abouttheauthor/artgallery.html
Monday, August 15, 2011
Me, William and A Gel Lifter
When I was a kid, my father spent a lot of time with me taking apart and reassembling equipment. I think in many ways it’s why I do what I do. And now that I’m the adult, I get to experience this from the other side, working with my nephews. This weekend Jon and I played with the Green Screen and a stuffed moose [poor poor moose…). And William and I worked on bad weather driving and designing a new forensic product.
In this case, we were working with gel lifters. For those of you who haven’t used them, gel lifters are used to pull up pattern impressions left on some surface. They work well and the ones we were using have such a low level of tack that they pull of only part of the impression. As a result they can separate one layer from another. But the draw-back is the impression is feint, so William and I were working on a contrasting aid that could be added to the lifter to increase resolution.
William told me he prefers proof of concept testing. He was speaking in comparison to the “work” of developing a finished product. And the truth is I couldn’t agree more. As I say often, it’s like day-camp without the adult supervision.
Our first attempt actually melted the lifter, the second washed away the print, but the third shows promise. I won’t say too much about the technology since, we’re just starting with it. And anyway my point today is how cool it was to spend some small time at the bench with my nephew. If you get the chance today, show someone younger the cool parts of what you do for a living. Trust me, their enjoyment is infectious.
But the hubbub of the trade show is behind me and I’m back to business as usual.
Until Later
- Charles
In this case, we were working with gel lifters. For those of you who haven’t used them, gel lifters are used to pull up pattern impressions left on some surface. They work well and the ones we were using have such a low level of tack that they pull of only part of the impression. As a result they can separate one layer from another. But the draw-back is the impression is feint, so William and I were working on a contrasting aid that could be added to the lifter to increase resolution.
William told me he prefers proof of concept testing. He was speaking in comparison to the “work” of developing a finished product. And the truth is I couldn’t agree more. As I say often, it’s like day-camp without the adult supervision.
Our first attempt actually melted the lifter, the second washed away the print, but the third shows promise. I won’t say too much about the technology since, we’re just starting with it. And anyway my point today is how cool it was to spend some small time at the bench with my nephew. If you get the chance today, show someone younger the cool parts of what you do for a living. Trust me, their enjoyment is infectious.
But the hubbub of the trade show is behind me and I’m back to business as usual.
Until Later
- Charles
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)