I'm working on an update to SQLAutoDoc, which is my pet database version control and monitoring application. A few years back I attended one of Edward R. Tufte's presentations (which I thoroughly enjoyed and highly recommend). One of the concepts mentioned by Mr. Tufte was something he called "sparklines" -- little tiny charts that are displayed in-line with text.

I want SQLAutoDoc to tell me about SQL Wait States so that I can quickly spot network issues but want to show the status of all available wait states. There are lots of them and the current wait state value often doesn't make a lot of sense unless it's viewed in context (does it frequently have that value? If so and the problem just started then the wait state is probably irrelevant). I thought sparklines would be the perfect mechanism to concisely display wait state information.

Well, looking around to see what others have done with sparklines, I happened across the blog of Dr. Nicolas Bissantz and an article entitled Dashboards vs Sparklines. This is a great article, makes a lot of sense and will impact how large I make my charts from now on! (IE: Why fill a page with a single chart when you can fill it with dozens! :)

So among my responsibilities is to interface with our ERP system. It's a three-tier system that uses COM-based business objects and a SQL Server database. What seems to happen pretty frequently is that one user or another will report a bug or request a new report but upon further research I find that the bug is actually a misunderstanding of what the report is showing, or that a report already exists that provides exactly the information that the user needs.

One problem, I think, is that the ERP software is quite complex. The documentation is pretty good but the implementation consultants added a bunch of custom modifications that are not documented. Adding fuel to this fire is the fact that the ERP system is a conversion of a midrange ERP system that used to run on AS/400s and the like. Many aspects of the UI seem out of place and difficult to use because they carry over the green screen terminal paradigm. Moreover the interface for the ERP system has recently been "modernized" (last version) so that some old functions are accessed in new ways.

I think the solution to this problem might be to anoint a few power users from each department as "ERP Angels" then have them trained extensively in the ERP system features that are commonly used by their department. These "Angels" will be resources for their departments as well as a common point of contact the IT department when enhancement requests are made.

I've completed "Atlas Shrugged". I think I more completely understand Ayn Rand's view of man, the universe and everything than I did after completing "The Fountainhead". Ayn Rand's heroes and villains are high-contrast with not much nuance and in fact Mr. Thompson, one of the bad guys, goes on for some length about what a reletivist he is.

Ayn Rand is a technologist that doesn't like mysticism (which, I believe translates into religion of any sort), charity, mercy or compromise. She also is a bit of a bigot and is not shy about referring to Indians (both the Long Island, USA and New Delhi, India variety) as uncouth savages although this is probably a reflection of the mode of her era as "Atlas Shrugged" was published in 1957.

Of the heroes of Atlas Shrugged, I find Hank Reardon the most interesting. He's an entrepreneur and an engineer and he happily works really long hours. His employees respect him for his honesty and unwillingness to compromise, and his wife despises him for his unwillingness to socialize.

Of the villains, Jim Taggart intrigues me. He is a schmoozer of the first order and is adept at gaining power and prestige by co opting others' efforts. Most fascinating though, is his behavior near the end of the book, when he is witnessing the torture of John Galt. Ayn Rand says that he wants to destroy success, that he hates John Galt because Galt is alive and won't be dominated, controlled or intimidated. I know that there are hateful, spiteful people in the world who derive perverse satisfaction from hindering the efforts of others or even harming them, but I need to think more about how well Jim Taggart maps to those people (for example, how about Foday Sankoh, leader of the rebel movement during Siera Leone's brutal civil war?)

On May 23rd Slashdot published a review of a book called "The Myths of Innovation" by Scott Berkun. This book is interesting in that (according to the review) it argues that most disruptive new techologies have not been invented by managers. Perhaps this reflects back to Ayn Rand's culture of the mind--schmoozing and engineering are perpendicular to each other.

I'm now listening to John Galt's extended radio rant so I think I'm almost finished with Atlas Shrugged.

Ayn Rand condemns mysticism and religion and holds self-interest as the sole rational reason for engaging in any action. I'm not sure this makes sense for society as a whole. When war heroes such as Sgt. Paul Smith die to save their comrades they are acting against their own personal self interest and in the communal self-interest. I think Ayn Rand would say that this is not rational, but I think that there is significant reward in doing one's duty. This might be similar to what Dagney is doing when she returns from the hidden valley. Much as she might like to stay, she knows that by not returning she will cause harm to men who she respects. She is unwilling to exact her own pleasure at the cost of bringing harm to those whom she counts as her friends.

In the Christian Science Monitor today I found a book review of Age of Betrayal: The Triumph of Money in America, 1865 – 1900. The book review describes the book as a treatise on the corruptive influence of corporations on democracy. What caught my eye was this quote:

Beatty describes this largely by focusing on Tom Scott, who built the Pennsylvania Railroad into a colossus and demonstrated a special gift for "winkling favors out of politicians" with handsome bribes. Yet as the railroads grew and their profits increased, he cut the wages paid to his employees. When the workers organized a strike in protest, Scott used political connections to crush them with federal troops.

Upon reading this, I found myself wondering if Tom Scott at all influenced Ayn Rand's portryal of James Taggart.

Of course, corporate depravity is far from being just a historical footnote. In yesterday's wall street journal is an article about TerraCycle Inc. TerraCycle is a small company that makes organic fertilizers and it is being sued by the much larger Scotts Miracle-Gro. The law suit alleges among other things that TerraCycle's packaging is too similar to Scotts and that TerraCycle has been making unfounded comparisons to Scotts' products even though TerraCycle has not specifically mentioned any Scotts brands, referring in its advertising only to "synthetic chemical fertilizers".

The lawsuit strikes me as an example of corporate looterdom. If James Taggert were CEO of Scotts, undoubtably he too would sue tiny competitors rather than try to beat them in the marketplace with better products and more effective marketing. The Wall Street Journal quotes Scotts spokesperson Su Lok as saying that "Scotts is a leading brand and like any other consumer brand, we have to protect our trade dress and brand and products. That is part of smart business." I would counter that while it might be smart business it is unethical, dishonest and a misuse of the law that is ultimately disruptive to our country and our economy. TerraCycle has a blog, www.suedbyscotts.com in which they are chronicling their legal battle with Scotts. Best of luck to you, TerraCycle!

I'm about four-fifths of the way through "Atlas Shrugged" now, and I've decided that I hate the dialog--especially the way that Hank Reardon and Dagney Tagert talk about love and sex. It's overly dramatic and wordy. I kind of wonder if Rand added the love interests as a way to tantalize and involve the reader, but I find them as out of place as if they had been written in a calculus textbook.

A lot has been made of Rand's philosophy. At this point, I'm thinking it's something like the philosophy of Thoreau/Emerson: "Trust thyself: every heart vibrates to that iron string".

Here are some interesting Ayn Rand/Atlas Shrugged resources:

The Penguin Guide to Ayn Rand's writings: http://us.penguingroup.com/static/rguides/us/atlas_shrugged.html

The SparkNote guide to the themes of Atlas Shrugged: http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/atlasshrugged/themes.html

A coworker offered me an insight into Verizon customer service, with which he also had found inefficient and intransigent. The insight is this: Verizon is not just a very large company with a labyrinthine bureaucracy -- it is also a monopoly.

Unlike some of the other businesses which Verizon oversees (internet, wireless) with land-lines Verizon has captive customers. We customers in north-eastern PA are required to purchase our land-line connections from Verizon so they has no incentive to pander to us.

Thus, the corporate culture of Verizon telephone is like the post-office. It's a Ticky-Tacky Little Boxes Culture.

However, VOIP is a disruptive influence. Verizon telephone is still subject to the rules and regulations that go hand-in-hand with being granted a monopoly. However, VOIP providers are not subject to those regulations. It's not that Verizon *can't* innovate - it's that those same government regulations that protect them from competition disincline them from doing so.

I suppose when you have a really big hammer, you like to imagine every problem as a nail. Verizon is good at working within the framework of government regulation. It's no surprise then that this is a tool that they use when threatened by Vonage, a serious competitor.

On another note, I am now two thirds of the way through "Atlas Shrugged" and it is seeming to me that there are strong parallels between Wesley Mooch and George Bush.

In the mail two days ago I received an advertisement from Verizon that offered me 12 months of land-line service, including unlimited long-distance, at $19.99/month.

Intrigued, I called them up. In general I dislike telephone companies. They're huge bureaucracies. My experience has been that it is difficult to find any person, much less the person who can help you with your specific issue.

When I called Verizon up yesterday to find out more about the offer I was not surprised to find my expectations fulfilled.

At the top of the flyer I received was printed a contact number. The flyer was for new telephone service but when I called the number I was greeted by an automatic attendant that asked me for my Verizion telephone number. I don't have one (no land-line) so I pushed 0# and was transferred to hold.

I waited on hold for three minutes before an operator picked up the line. I tried to explain what I was looking for but was interrupted before I could complete my first sentence. "Let me transfer you," the operator said and without waiting for a response, he did. I was placed back to hold.

I waited on hold again for 10 minutes before a second operator answered the line. This time I was able to explain what it was that I was looking for. "Do you currently have Verizon service?" the operator asked. When I said that I didn't she said "I'll need to transfer you to new accounts." This operator was more helpful. When I said that I had already spent about twenty minutes and that I didn't want to be placed back on hold she said that she would stay on the line until the new accounts representative picked up the line, and she did.

The new accounts rep greeted me, asked for my name and address and then for my social security number. "You don't have to provide your social security number but we need to do a credit check. If you don't provide your social security number, your application may take longer to process." I thought about this for a moment. Why provide any personal information I don't have to, I reasoned, and told the new account rep that I would rather not provide my social security number. He said something about faxing but when I said that I did not have a fax machine nearby he recommended that I try the internet. I thanked him and hung up.

Later that evening, I went to Verzion.com and completed an internet account application. Again, I chose not to provide my social security number. I submitted my application and received an email confirmation asking me to call Verizon customer support at a number that was provided in the body of the email.

I made that call earlier today and was asked again for my social security number. Feeling beaten down a bit, I decided to provide it to the account rep but then was told that in order to verify my identity they would need to ask 5 questions including my place of work as reported on my income tax return. I asked the account rep how they would know this. She said through the credit bureau. I said, ask me the other four questions--let's come back to place of employment as I wasn't sure that Verizon had any business knowing where I work. She refused and I hung up the call.

My intention is to check my credit report to see if place of employment is indeed reported. If it is, I will be curious as how this information is obtained. I can't believe it is, as the Verizon sales rep stated, obtained from my tax return.

Also today I happened across an article on MSNBC that mentions how Verizon is experiencing a fall in the number of traditional line subscribers. I think the article, my negative experience with the Verizon beaucracy and Verizon's lawsuit against Vonage together show a business that has in the past been able to profit by regulation (like Ayn Rand's Oren Boyle) and which when now faced with a technologically superior upstart in Vonage (and other VOIP providers) is turning to the courts in an attempt to force consumers not to choose the better technology.

I'm now on the third audio segment of Atlas Shrugged (there are seven segments in total). Ayn Rand's fictional world is starting to grind to a halt under the dual stimulation of excessive regulations passed by self-serving government regulators and a lack of qualified engineers (due largely to a series of mysterious retirements).

While I do not think that Atlas Shrugged models the real world (nor am I sure that it is intended to) I do think that the political maneuvering described in the book is quite common not just in government but also in business.

Rand has her protagonists describe those who attempt to use guilt, sympathy or social connections as a way to profit from the work of others as "looters". It seems like many of the looters in Atlas Shrugged can be found apologizing for their failures. "It's not my fault," one character says, having bankrupted a savings and loan through inadvisably liberal loan policies. Another character, bowing to social pressure to purchase services in a manner which benefits a friend but which is more expensive and less reliable than the alternative says when he is unable to deliver an order on time, "it's not my fault."

I've seen this before, in places where I've worked. It seems to be a sign of some kind of organizational cancer. Instead of working together to resolve the issue, two group leaders traded recriminations. One leader said "the software you delivered is buggy and failed to address our needs" and the other responded with "you didn't supply us with decent requirements and didn't respond promptly when we had questions about your business practices". Really, both were at fault, with one failing to allocate enough time to design and requirements analysis and the other not recognizing the importance of communicating with the development staff.

What I would have liked to have seen was both groups saying "OK, we had problems. Let's talk about what we did wrong and what we should do differently next time." However, I think it was convenient to both groups to be able to say, "it wasn't our fault. We would have done just fine had the other group met its obligations." I think they played this "blame game" so that they would have an excuse at hand should other problems surface later on. How would Hank Reardon fare in such an environment? I doubt he would emerge as CEO of a big company due to his unwillingness to protect himself from political traps. Then again, perhaps that is Rand's point.

So "Atlas Shrugged" is a very large audio book. Audible divides it into 7 separate downloads and lists the book as taking 52 hours and 19 minutes to listen to.

I'm now about a third of the way through section 2.

"Atlas Shrugged" strikes me as somewhat speculative. There is a pirate off the coast of New York, and a new type of steel alloy that has miraculous properties. There are vague references to the sorry economic state of the world and mention of a hijacked shipment of relief aid to the "people's state of france".

Much of these first two sections seem to be taken up with the scheming machinations of government, especially those who wish to use government to ensure that they are able to maintain a comfortable standard of living with minimal effort. As I listen, I can't help but think of the recent lawsuits brought by Verizon against Vonage, and by Viacom against Google.

These two lawsuits have something in common with each other and with the machinators in "Atlas Shrugged". Both Verizon and Viacom represent industries which have grown comfortable on the status quo and which are threatened, like Rand's Orin Boyle, by revolutionary technical innovation. In Verizon's case this is voice over IP, and in Viacom's case this is YouTube and viral TV. Rather than attempt to compete fairly, both Viacom and Verizon have sought the aid of the government to help them preserve their market position.

Verizon argues that Vonage is infringing on a patent. Possible though this may be, the concept of patent was not intended for this purpose--to squash innovation through the use of courts and Verizon 's lawsuit is both a misuse of the legal system and dishonest.

Similarly, Viacom has sued Google for copyright infringement because its television shows are occasionally posted on YouTube. Instead of suing, Viacom should adapt to the new medium, should find a way to profit from the changing entertainment ecology. To use the courts to stave off innovation is, as Rand portrays in "Atlas Shrugged", harmful and unethical.

I've been using Firefox as my primary browser for several years now. Up until a few days ago my repertoire of installed Firefox extensions consisted of Flash and Acrobat.

When I happened across an article spot-lighting several Firefox extensions on computerworld.com, I decided to give them a try.

Here are my top 7 favorites from the computerworld list:

1. Google Browser Sync enables me to have the same bookmark list at work that I do at home, and synchronizes my cookies so that I don't have to remember so many obscure passwords for rarely visited web sites.
   
   
2. Session Manager remembers a collection of open windows. It's sort of like being able to bookmark a session. This is very convenient as I usually have three or four firefox tabs always open (my mail, the news, etc.) and Session Manager remembers this configuration each time I start up FireFox.
   
   
3. IE Tab is helpful for those sites that only support Internet Explorer. Using IE Tab you can easily view such sites without leaving FireFox. It's also helpful if you want to test your HTML/Javascript against both FireFox and IE.
   
   
4. I like IE's built-in FTP client but hate having to leave FireFox to use it. Now, with FireFTP I no longer need to use IE's FTP. FireFTP is a full-featured FTP client that runs in a browser session.
   
   
5. One of the reasons that I like FireFox is the extra information that I see in the Error Console when developing Javascript. Firebug increases the amount of debug information available to the developer and makes it visible in a window at the bottom of the screen. This is great as I've always found keeping track of the seperate Error Console window a bit of a hassle.
   
   
6. Do you ever need to match a color displayed on a web page? For example when you're modifying an existing site and need to keep the theme intact? In the past my approach had been to take a screen snapshot then use Photoshop's eyedropper tool. ColorZilla makes this *so* much easier. Now I just click on the ColorZilla icon at in the Firefox tray area and then hover over the color I want to match.
   
   
7. Also useful is MeasureIt which allows you to easily measure any area on screen to determine the height and width in pixels.