<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Peter's Photography &#187; Improve the World</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.peterdrier.com/category/improve-the-world/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.peterdrier.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Sep 2011 15:18:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
<cloud domain='www.peterdrier.com' port='80' path='/?rsscloud=notify' registerProcedure='' protocol='http-post' />
		<item>
		<title>Can I&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://www.peterdrier.com/2008/05/05/can-i/</link>
		<comments>http://www.peterdrier.com/2008/05/05/can-i/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 May 2008 17:08:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peter</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Improve the World]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peterdrier.com/blog/2008/05/05/can-i/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[JA &#8211; Can I get a picture with some hot bitches? Me &#8211; No! JA &#8211; (taken aback..) What? Me &#8211; Have some respect.. JA &#8211; Can I have a picture with some of these nice ladies? Lets not even get into the conversation of &#8220;may I&#8221; vs. &#8220;can I&#8221;&#8230; Me &#8211; Better..  It&#8217;s up [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>JA &#8211; Can I get a picture with some hot bitches?<br />
Me &#8211; No!<br />
JA &#8211; (taken aback..) What?<br />
Me &#8211; Have some respect..<br />
JA &#8211; Can I have a picture with some of these nice ladies?</p>
<p>Lets not even get into the conversation of &#8220;may I&#8221; vs. &#8220;can I&#8221;&#8230;</p>
<p>Me &#8211; Better..  It&#8217;s up to them though..<br />
JA &#8211; Looks around..  (crickets chirping at the sudden swarm of guys that surrounded him)<br />
Me &#8211; (waiting patiently while counting to 10..)<br />
JA &#8211; How about these two?  (Points at 2 ladies I&#8217;ve already chatted with, neither single..)<br />
Me &#8211; Still up to them..<br />
JA &#8211; Proceeds to negotiate picture, with surprising success.<br />
Me &#8211; (Takes picture, trying to minimize the &#8220;yikes&#8221; look they were giving me.)<br />
JA &#8211; (Moves on..)<br />
Me &#8211; (to the ladies) Sorry about that..<br />
Ladies &#8211; No worries, he had is moment.. Most likely the best he&#8217;ll have all night!<br />
Me &#8211; True..  True..</p>
<p>JA = Jackass by the way..  read <a href="http://standingonthebox.blogspot.com/2008/05/nightlife-cream-of-crop.html">this</a> for more info..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.peterdrier.com/2008/05/05/can-i/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Fairtax</title>
		<link>http://www.peterdrier.com/2007/12/27/fairtax/</link>
		<comments>http://www.peterdrier.com/2007/12/27/fairtax/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Dec 2007 20:29:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peter</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Improve the World]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peterdrier.com/blog/2007/12/27/fairtax/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Based on a comment I made to this Times article. &#8212; I&#8217;m a big fan of the FairTax proposal, my only challenge/question is around conversion.  None of what I&#8217;ve read suggested anything other than a cold turkey cut over..   Not being a big fan of such a drastic changes, I couldn&#8217;t support that. As an [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Based on a comment I made to <a href="http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/26/what-would-an-independent-irs-look-like/">this</a> Times article.</p>
<p>&#8212;</p>
<p>I&#8217;m a big fan of the <a href="http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB119863013677849835.html?mod=blogs">FairTax</a> proposal, my only challenge/question is around conversion.  None of what I&#8217;ve read suggested anything other than a cold turkey cut over..   Not being a big fan of such a drastic changes, I couldn&#8217;t support that.</p>
<p>As an alternative..  And considering FairTax is so (relatively) simple, it could be added to the existing system easily with a 1% rate to start.  Phase in the prebates as well, while reducing the legacy tax rates concurrently.</p>
<p>2 years at 1%, 2 years at 5%, then increase by 2.5% a year though 20%, and adjust yearly after that..</p>
<p>That&#8217;s roughly a 10 year phase in..  Gives all those folks currently working in the various tax related industries a bit of time to find other work.  Also gives the system some time to work itself out while the actual rate is low (1%).  Confidence in the system would also grow as lower income folks actually began to see the prebate checks come (possibly yearly at the 1% rate, quarterly at the 5% rate, and monthly at the 10% and up rates)</p>
<p>heck, the government could even give everyone an ATM/credit card for their respective prebate money.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.peterdrier.com/2007/12/27/fairtax/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Cable boxes blow</title>
		<link>http://www.peterdrier.com/2007/12/10/cable-boxes-blow/</link>
		<comments>http://www.peterdrier.com/2007/12/10/cable-boxes-blow/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Dec 2007 21:36:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peter</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Improve the World]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peterdrier.com/blog/2007/12/10/cable-boxes-blow/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As of right now, at home we have the following: HD DVR Cable Box Cable modem Wireless Router VoIP box All tolled, that&#8217;s 4 power connections, a cable splitter, 2 RG6 cables, and 2 ethernet cables before anything else is hooked up. Did my cable company provide a cable management solution, or even a power [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As of right now, at home we have the following:</p>
<ul>
<li>HD DVR Cable Box</li>
<li>Cable modem</li>
<li>Wireless Router</li>
<li>VoIP box</li>
</ul>
<p>All tolled, that&#8217;s 4 power connections, a cable splitter,  2 RG6 cables, and 2 ethernet cables before anything else is hooked up.  Did my cable company provide a cable management solution, or even a power strip? Of course not!</p>
<p>So why don&#8217;t cable companies do this&#8230; ?</p>
<p>Imagine a &#8220;triple-play&#8221; box, that took the inbound coax, and was:</p>
<p>* HD Receiver<br />
* HD DVR<br />
* Cable Modem<br />
* VoIP Telephone<br />
* Wireless router</p>
<p>The cable companies would only need one box, and they could remotely, instantly, turn on services the user doesn&#8217;t already have when desired.  Joe Schmoe cable subscriber could call up Customer Service and ask for Internet to be Installed.  Bam! Done.  So fast it could give cable companies a positive customer service rep for once.</p>
<p>No splitters, power adapters, ethernet cables and the resulting stronger cable signal would be side benefits.</p>
<p>Sure, the box itself would cost a bit more, but I&#8217;d bet that increase wouldn&#8217;t be as much in quantity as the labor and other support issues cost having multiple different boxes for each service.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s my understanding that the HD DVR box costs something in the $300-400 range.  The cable modem is probably $30 these days (the one I bought 5 years ago was $100), and similar for the VoIP router.  Wireless router should be $40 in bulk.  Add those 3 boxes to the HD DVR box would add 1/3 &#8211; 1/4 of it&#8217;s total cost, while reducing service calls (to add or remove service) and increasing customer service and customer satisfaction.   I realize these might be foreign concepts the typical cable company, but why not give it a try?</p>
<p>Edit:  Additional (specific) features this box should also have:</p>
<ul>
<li>4+ Ethernet ports, 100 megabit full duplex minimum.  8 ports @ gigabit preferred.</li>
<li>The standard features of a NAT firewall</li>
<li>VLan for wireless configurable to be separate from wired ports</li>
<li>E-SATA port for adding additional storage for DVR purposes</li>
<li>Wireless IEEE802.11b/g minimum, with &#8216;n&#8217; also preferred.</li>
<li>HDMI output</li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.peterdrier.com/2007/12/10/cable-boxes-blow/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

