James Flanigan (LA Times): Costco Sees Value in Higher Pay.
"We pay better than the supermarkets, and we pay much better than
Wal-Mart," (CEO) Sinegal says. "That's not altruism," he continues.
"It's good business."
Representing Specified Values in OWL08/04/2004 06:57 PM 2004-08-03: The Semantic Web Best Practices and Deployment (SWBPD)
Working Group has released the First Public Working Draft of
Representing Specified Values in OWL: "value partitions" and "value
sets." Comments are welcome. The draft presents methods for
representing modified values and collections of values in the OWL Web
Ontology Language. Visit the Semantic Web home page. (News archive)
Retailer Not So Charming
Retailer Not So Charming07/09/2004 11:46 AM Here's an example of a sizable insider sale that eerily presaged
downbeat sales news.
A week ago I provided a values
self-test, and asked for your help creating a complete list of human
values, ranked in order of importance. I also promised to provide my
own list and rankings. The chart above is the composite of the
responses. It suggests that there are nine facets to our happiness:
Health, Home, Connection, Discovery, Work, Peace, Play, Awareness and
Self-Esteem. Each of these has aspects that vary depending on our
culture, and their relative importance varies from person to person.
I've shown Family as an aspect of Connection, but for some it may be
inseparable from Home. I've shown 'Work' in quotation marks because I
mean it in the broader sense of 'making a living', rather than the
narrow sense of employment. Again, for some people, self-styled
'home-makers', this may be inseparable from Home. And I've grouped
Personal Values and Beliefs under Discovery because they're part of
self-discovery, making meaning of our lives. You may quibble with my
terminology and groupings, but I'm reasonably confident that this
schema represents a set of Universal Human Values. In fact, I'd say it
represents the values of all sentient life -- from my readings and
personal study of birds, I think ravens, at least, share these nine
values and strive, consciously or unconsciously, to maximize their
achievement. These are the things that drive us all, that motivate all
activity, and because they're all essential to survival of the
species,
they're probably all coded into our DNA.
Alas, just because we may have a shared set of core values doesn't
make
it any easy to achieve agreement on how to maximize and achieve them.
The answer to "How Do We Best Achieve These Things" is a function
of:
The information we can bring to bear
The frames
through which we filter and assess that information
Our culture: Accepted and preferred behaviours
Let's consider the sixth value, Peace, for example. Some of us believe
it is appropriate or even necessary to take aggressive action to
'secure' peace, while others believe in passive resistance to
peace-threatening actions. Some of us, because of the frames through
which we process information about acts of violence, believe that
force
(forces of 'evil') must be met with force (forces of 'good'), while
others with different frames believe we are all good, and that the
solution to violence is to address the inhuman circumstances that give
rise to such unnatural and desperate acts. Some of us believe the role
of the collective is to secure peace, to protect the community from
hostile outsiders, and everything else is the responsibility of the
individual. Others believe we are all responsible for each other in
every sense and aspect of our lives, and that our collective agents
(like governments) should exercise that responsibility extensively and
diligently.
So, if we cannot agree on How to achieve these values, is there even
any point to agreeing on What they are?
I think there is, for two reasons. First, and most obviously, it helps
us to better understand and find common cause with those with
different
frames, since, at bottom, we're all looking for the same thing.
Secondly, it can help us look rationally at our beliefs and
behaviours,
to assess whether they really make sense in light of what they are
intended to appreciate and achieve.
Here's an interesting example of the latter: One thing most liberals
and most conservatives seem to agree on is the value, at least in
theory, of globalization. Liberals don't like the way globalization
can
cause massive social and environmental damage, or how it's been abused
to force third world countries to adopt Western political and economic
policies and give up control of their economies, land and resources,
but most believe that it is quite possible to mitigate these negatives
and still reap the benefit
of free movement of goods and services at market prices as a mechanism
of humanitarianism and eventually economic, social and political
improvement. Conservatives see globalization as the ultimate
manifestation of a 'free' (unimpeded by government) economy, and as a
means to export 'good' Western values, but even they are more than a
little worried about a global government that they don't control
(hence
their loathing of the UN).
What is implicit in the both the liberal and conservative worldviews
of
globalization's benefits is that cultural homogenization is a good
thing. To the conservative, one world adhering to American values
would
be free of terrorism -- if we're all brought up with the same values
and beliefs (and believing in the One True God) the only crime that
would be left would be crimes of sloth and similar individual
moral weakness, universally abhorred and 'nipped in the bud' by a
uniform global 'spare the rod and spoil the child' criminal justice
system. All believing the same, growing up the same, with the same
'opportunity' -- what better way to achieve World Peace? To the
liberal, one world adhering to an agreed-upon consensus of laws,
standards and values would be the 'UN done right', where with only one
government, there would be no 'other government' to wage war on, and
with a global meeting-place for sharing ideas and resolving
disagreements, there would be limited support for civil war as
well.
These neo-liberal and neo-conservative views, though, both implicitly
see cultural heterogeneity as a threat to world peace. What is
interesting about this 'if we're all the same we'll get along'
rationale is that it is imperialistic and utterly ignorant of the
anthropological reasons why such cultural heterogeneity arose in the
first place. Indeed, most anthropologists argue that man is already
astonishingly culturally homogeneous already, and that cultural
imperialism and cultural homogeneity have grown in near-perfect
lock-step with the scale of human violence and war.
In hunter-gatherer cultures, both human and animal, there is little
cultural homogeneity between communities, and inter-mixing between
communities is rare. Anthropologists are astonished at how tribes
living just a few miles apart had rituals, beliefs, religions and even
diets that were completely alien to each other, almost unimaginably
different. Our civilization culture's expansion, imperialism, and
language impositions have compromised these differences enormously,
but
they are still somewhat observable. Even after several hundred years
civilization culture is so utterly alien to North American First
Nations people that they have proved almost impossible to integrate
and
assimilate.
Why would nature, and evolution have encouraged this innate
heterogeneity, this xenophobia which almost inevitably leads to
inter-cultural conflict? The obvious reason is resistance to disease.
As AIDS has shown so horrifically, and the Plague before it, movement
of people between cultures brings the risk of epidemics, and the more
culturally homogeneous the species, the greater the risk that such
epidemics will wipe out the entire race. This homogeneity-caused
fragility is not unique to humans -- we've seen it in the Avian Flu,
and the spread of Mad Cow, and the devastation that this fragility
caused during the Irish Potato Famine should be enough to make us
think
twice about the desirability of us, and our staple foods, being
increasingly genetically indistinguishable around the world, and the
desirability of our being able to travel around the world and infect
so
many others with new exotic diseases so easily.
That's the evolutionary explanation for nature's abhorrence for
homogeneity, and possibly the reason we are inherently so xenophobic
and intolerant of other cultures. But beyond the genetic fragility of cultural
homogeneity, cultural homogeneity also brings with it memetic
fragility -- a lack of variety of ideas. You can already see evidence
of this poverty of imagination in corporations and cults where
intellectual and behavioural conformity is strongly encouraged: no
innovation, group-think leading to inflexibility and denial of the
existence of problems, vulnerability to seduction by false comforts,
and brainwashing.
So assuming that cultural homogeneity is an inevitable consequence of
globalization, at least the globalization models we've come up with so
far, is the resultant genetic and memetic fragility that we would get
along with 'world peace' worth all the wars and imperialistic
devastation necessary to achieve it? Is the benefit of increasing
Peace, one of the nine universal human values, outweighed by the
commensurate reduction in Health and Home and Discovery, three of the
other values?
I prefer to take my learnings from nature, which may or may not be as
'smart' as we are but which demonstrated, especially prior to the
advent of civilization, a remarkable resilience and ability to
optimize
these nine universal values, not just for pre-civilized man but for
all
other life on the planet as well.
Nature would suggest, I think, that the answer is not One World,
homogeneous, a single world political and economic and cultural
system,
but instead a rediscovery of community, of diversity, of the richness
and strength of cultural difference, of heterogeneity.
Nature would suggest that community, not nuclear family or 'household'
or nation-state, is the place and level of aggregation where we will
find the true meaning of Home, of Belonging, of Love and Relationship
and Connection and Self-Sufficiency, and that the land and environment
and all the creatures on it that constitute our Home are sacred and
inviolable and belong to no one.
Nature would suggest that Discovery and Learning and Personal Values
and Beliefs are most effectively found by personal exploration, by
trial and error, through all of our senses in the real world, not by
reading textbooks in classrooms.
Nature would suggest that 'Work', making a living, is done most
successfully and meaningfully by cooperatively and collaboratively, as
equals, beholden to no one but one's chosen partners, helping
ourselves
and others meet real, unmet needs.
Nature would suggest that Peace comes from respecting the differences
and sovereignty of other communities, in celebrating their diversity
as
robust and astonishing communities in the human experiment, and in
trading ideas and goods reciprocally when it is necessary and to the
benefit of all.
Nature would suggest that Playfulness and Awareness and Self-Esteem
are
part of the very essence and meaning of life and that our modern
civilized world which trivializes and veils and manipulates our
achievement of these things turns a world of joy into a prison and
cripples us as human beings.
But I'm not sure I could convince a conservative, or a radical
Islamist, or even a Third World child captivated by the possibility of
modern American life, of this.
We may share the same universal values, but we see them, and the road
to their achievement, through utterly different eyes.
washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A45366-2004Jul12.html track
this site | 5 links
Adopted family values
Adopted family values12/27/2004 03:18 PM The Evan Parker Scott
case bears more than a passing resemblance to the Baby Richard case of
several years ago. Once more, a toddler who barely knows what's going
on is being confiscated by the parent who gave him up in the first
place. Is the domestic adoption system broken?
Google values its own privacy. How does it value yours?
Studios Sue Retailer for Piracy (AP)05/30/2004 10:10 PM AP - Two Hollywood movie studios have sued an online retailer,
accusing Technology One of defiantly selling DVD-copying software
previously barred by two federal courts.
Online retailer retreats on IPO
Online retailer retreats on IPO05/22/2004 06:32 PM Bradenton Herald,FL-5 hours agoBy Mark Schwanhausser. If anyone is
worried that Google mania could spur a new Internet bubble, an obscure
East Bay company might have eased that fear Friday. ...
Namespaces, Name With Spaces, and Attribute Values
Namespaces, Name With Spaces, and Attribute Values10/28/2003 11:06 PM In this month's XML Q&A column John Simpson answers questions about
namespace prefixes and the legality of XML element names that include
spaces.
more info on bush family values
more info on bush family values01/27/2004 07:06 AM hmm, sex with random hookers in asia? illicit business deals with the
son of the chinese president? I'm sure it's just a fluke.
FC Now: A Towel Slap at Hotels' All-Wet Values
FC Now: A Towel Slap at Hotels' All-Wet Values06/05/2005 11:42 PM Values are like the old Seinfeld bit about rental car reservations.
Companies are very good at expressing values (i.e. taking the car
reservation), but they're never much good at keeping them. A small
case in point: On a recent pleasure...
'Organically Grown' Nerd Values
'Organically Grown' Nerd Values06/03/2004 12:27 AM Mark Glaser has written up an
interesting piece on the growth of Craigslist.org and the competition
it gives similar but more commercial ventures. According to Craig
himself, Craiglist is run as a
"non-commercial" site based on "nerd values" -- where things are done
for the effect on the world, not necessarily the pocketbook.
Apparently, Craig has turned down some lucrative offers for ads and
buyouts. And after doing so, he's continured to slowly build up a
comfortable (& profitable) business that threatens major newspapers.
Depending on how you look at it, classified ads are being "stolen
away" from major newspapers by this Bay-Area-grown community. On the
other hand, many of the ads that go up on Craigslist might never have
been placed in a newspaper for various reasons. Craigslist doesn't
publish its earnings, but even assuming it has none, it has definitely
succeeded in its "nerdy" goal of changing some small part of the
world.
Passing values from Excel to the web via AppleScript
Passing values from Excel to the web via AppleScript06/23/2004 09:31 AM It took me some time to figure out how to pass a variable from an
Excel table to a form on the web using a do Javascript in Safari, but
I finally did figure it out sometime ago and would like to share it
with the group. I wi...
Dixons offer for Greek retailer07/08/2004 03:29 AM The UK-based electrical chain makes an offer to buy a controlling
stake in Greek chain P Kotsovolos.
Online retailer retreats on IPO (SiliconValley.com)
Online retailer retreats on IPO (SiliconValley.com)05/22/2004 06:38 AM SiliconValley.com - If anyone is worried that Google mania could spur
a new Internet bubble, an obscure East Bay company might have eased
that fear Friday.
Hollywood Sues Retailer for Piracy (AP)
Hollywood Sues Retailer for Piracy (AP)05/28/2004 02:17 PM AP - Two Hollywood movie studios have sued an online retailer,
accusing Technology One of defiantly selling DVD-copying software
previously barred by two federal courts.
Internet retailer to lease site02/12/2004 02:43 AM JS Online Feb 12 2004 7:09AM GMT Grok Description matches for A Big-Box Retailer that Values Employees GrokA matches for A Big-Box Retailer that Values Employees
A Big-Box Retailer that Values Employees
The following phrases have been identified by the grok system as matching this entry:
