Name:J. Daniel Location: California, United States Birthday:8/1/1979 Gender:Male
Interests:Fin 523, Econ 590, Econ 595 Expertise:AP Government, AP Economics, Econ, US History Occupation:Education/training Industry:Education/Research
Steve Jobs' 2005 Stanford Commencement Speech is one of my two favorite graduation speeches. The other is Conan O'Brien's 2011 Dartmouth College Commencement Address. Absolutely hilarious. While both talks are different in content, the theme of bouncing back from life's adversities is what make these two speeches great. Steve Jobs tells three stories: how he dropped out of college, how he built Apple and got fired, and how he dealt with cancer.
Steve Jobs was supposed to be adopted by college graduates, but they backed out the last minute when they decided on having a girl instead. Paul and Clara Jobs ended up being the adoptive parents despite their lack of a college education. The future Apple CEO's biological mother only signed off with adoption on the condition that they send Steve to college. And off to Reed college, he did go. After only 6 months, though, Jobs dropped out. And for 18 months, he dropped in to take classes that appealed to him. Looking back on my days at Claremont, I wonder if I should have taken such a path. Perhaps not to the extent of dropping out, but having the chutzpah to take classes for learnings' sake rather to simply fulfill a GE requirement. I majored in Government and when I was done with my required classes, I tacked on economics in order to have a more quantitative major on my transcript. I have no regrets on taking that particular course of action. What I do wish was that I challenged myself more academically my junior and senior years in college and been a better steward of my time. My mindset was more of doing the least amount of work for the maximum amount of benefit. I valued sleeping in and just relaxing way too much, in retrospect. I regret not having engrossed myself during a period of my life when I totally could have exerted more effort and falling prey to doing "B-level" and sometimes "C-level" work. Not only in my academic affairs but in my spiritual, athletic and extracurricular pursuits. I'm proud of my four-year Varsity baseball career as a Stag, but sometimes I'm plagued with a whole bunch of "What ifs." What if I worked out consistently? What if I kept in better shape and ran 3 miles a day? What if I meticulously studied my mechanics and developed my mental game in a more systematic way. What if. What Steve Jobs was so brilliant at was devoting everything that he had towards his passion and taking the what if scenario out of the picture. That's what I got out of Jobs' college dropout lesson. You have to sometimes be comfortable doing the things that other people aren't doing. Be a leader and not a follower.
Steve Jobs built Apple and then got fired from Apple. Well, not really. Although Mr. Jobs successfully turned Apple into a billion dollar company, he somewhat reluctantly ceded control of the company to Mr. John Sculley, famously converting him to the ranks of Apple by asking him whether he wanted to "sell sugar water for the rest of your life or come with me and change the world?" Well, the problem was that Jobs was a product person whereas Sculley was not. Jobs saw the big picture and Sculley focused on short-term profit maximization. When their differing visions of Apple collided, the board ended up siding with Sculley. They didn't fire Jobs per se, but he was exiled from being the manager of the Macintosh division to being a mere figurehead. There was no way that Jobs would stand for that, so he quit the billion dollar company that he built at the age of 30. And what did he do next? He built NeXT and then went on to Pixar. Apple bought NeXT and Pixar was bought out by Disney, making Jobs the single largest shareholder of Disney. Now, Jobs didn't actually create Toy Story or A Bug's Life (although he probably wouldn't argue with you if you made the claim that he did), but it was under his watch and financial backing that Pixar's brand became what it is today. After being fired and ousted in a public way, Jobs bounced back. Sunk cost. There's no benefit in ruing over what might have been. Coulda, woulda, shoulda. Likewise, I've made some life decisions that I'm not proud of. I wish I could step into a time portal like the one found in Stephen King's 11/22/63 (a book I'm currently reading right now dealing with how the protagonist, Jake Eppling, somehow transports back to 1958 to change the future by stopping Lee Harvey Oswald from assassinating JFK) and undo decisions. To make right things what once went wrong. But, to my knowledge, we can't do that. Not for ourselves or our friends or our families. You do what you do and you live with the consequences, for better or worse. What's so distinguishing about Jobs' life was his uncanny ability to respond to such a major setback in his life and not only do well, but do things in an insanely great fashion. iMac. iPod. iPhone. iPad. Unbelievable. Jobs is proof that life's second act can not only exceed life's first but take a quantum leap past the original take. Godfather 2 can actually be better the Godfather 1. As apostle Paul writes in Philippians 3:12-14 (NIV),
12 Not that I have already obtained all this, or have already arrived at my goal, but I press on to take hold of that for which Christ Jesus took hold of me. 13 Brothers and sisters, I do not consider myself yet to have taken hold of it. But one thing I do: Forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ahead, 14 I press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus.
Jobs understood that the past is exactly that. The past. Sure, you can connect the dots and learn from your mistakes, but you can't live in them. You can't go back to the original Macintosh. You need to constantly reinvent yourself. It's not that you're creating a whole new persona for yourself. It's that you have to assess the situation as it is right now, be brutally honest with yourself and then getto work the work that needs to be done. You can't rely on your past glories or failures. You have to live in the present, not in the past or some sort of nebulous future. And that clarity of vision is whatallowed Jobs to achieve such great things.
It's the final part of Jobs' commencement speech that is the most chilling: Remembering that I'll be dead soon is the most important tool I've ever encountered to help me make the big choices in life. Because almost everything — all external expectations, all pride, all fear of embarrassment or failure - these things just fall away in the face of death, leaving only what is truly important. Remembering that you are going to die is the best way I know to avoid the trap of thinking you have something to lose. You are already naked. There is no reason not to follow your heart. Death comes to us all. Such a simple but a poignant truth. Chances are that no one (on this earth) in 100 years will really think or care about Jibin Daniel Park and the life that he led while on earth. Really. I love my wife and she loves me. I love my son, Zachary, and am ready to die to protect my family. And yet, when death stares me down, I will be alone. Naked. Just me. I will have to answer for my life's work and actions. When I stand in front of the judgment seat of Christ, I won't have my Mom vouching for me or my friends testifying for me. No, Christ will just gaze into my soul and know. He'll know every word, thought, deed, action, and I'll be judged right then and there. The Lamb of God will act as the omnipotent, omniscient judge and jury ready to evaluate instantaneously. I know I'm forgiven of my sins because of Christ's blood shed for me, but what did I do with that truth in my life. Will I be a prince or a pauper in heaven? Have I been Jesus to those in need? To my students? Will the work that I have done on this earth stand or will they simply burn away? It's a scary thought. Well worth pondering.
The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it? (Jeremiah 17:9).
Mark Zuckerberg and Larry Page have had different experiences with their internet companies. Were I to take my company public, I'm not quite sure which of the two divergent paths I would take.
Let's start of with Larry Page of Google.
Page started Google with fellow Stanford graduate student, Sergey Brin. By the time the duo took Google to venture capitalists and had created the fancy algorithms that make Google what it is today, Page & Brin had to make a decision regarding the leadership of the company. To satisfy the demands of the initial investors, Google's founders opted to cede power to an experienced Silicon Valley executive. Since Steve Jobs had no intention of leaving Apple, Eric Schmidt became the CEO. The trio of Schmidt, Page & Brin is what took Google from a nice search engine to a company with a market capitalization of approximately $200 billion. It was recently that "adult supervision" was no longer required at Google and Schmidt stepped down to usher in the Larry Page era of Google. And what a bold new era it is. Employee bonuses tied to success with social networks. Google+. And most recently, Monday's $12.5 billion purchase of Motorala Mobility.
One approach in starting a company is to defer to those with more experience than you have and then venture into the lead as the CEO only after you've gained a sense of what a demanding role it actually is. Page took it one step at a time.
And then there's Mark Zuckerberg. From creating theFacebook with his fellow Harvard classmates to what it is today as a $50 billion+ company, Zuckerberg has maintained his control as CEO from the beginning. He never had any intentions of stepping aside to let someone more experienced take over his role as the company's visionary. Unlike Page, theFacebook was Zuckerberg's baby from the beginning and he had no intention of letting anyone else take Facebook in a direction that was not his doing. He plunged into uncharted waters and even admitted to his employees that he was learning on the job as CEO. Such an approach is bound to be rife with mistakes. And yet it worked for Zuckerberg. He pressed on with his vision with Facebook when others around him were pressuring him to focus on advertising or other silly things like making a profit. Zuckerberg had the vision to stick with his vision of making Facebook cool and focusing on growing his user base instead of selling to Yahoo for a measly $1 billion.
So who had the superior approach: Page or Zuckerberg?
The answer is probably both. Had Page taken the helm from the beginning, Google may not have become the search engine behemoth that it is today. And had Zuckerberg ceded control of his board seats to those not aligned with his vision, perhaps Facebook would have become just another Friendster or Myspace.
I'm fascinated as to how the Google Facebook Wars will play out in the next couple of years. Will Google+ make inroads with Facebook? When will Facebook go public and how will that affect Zuckerberg's ability to follow his vision for the company when it might be at odds with the short-term profitability interests of shareholders?
Jonathan Broxton"The Bull" - It appears as if Jonathan Broxton will face the same issues this year as he did last year. Despite his being 3 for 3 in saves conversion, he's already given up 2 HRs to Pat Burrell and Aaron Rowand in his first and most recent outing, respectively. It is unlikely even for a hard-thrower like Broxton to experience any measure of success when he seemingly has the inability to spot his pitches. Ever since Matt Stairs hit that moonshot against Broxton on October 14, 2008, (Game 4 of the NLCS), it seems as if batters have figured out that Broxton is quite hittable. And it appears that Broxton is throwing in the low-to-mid 90s rather than the mid-to-high 90s of late, so command of his fastball is more important. I'm interested to see how Don Mattingly will handle a likely Broxton meltdown during the season. Unfortunately, it appears as if Donnie baseball will have a long leash with Broxton.
Hong Chi Kuo - In his two outings thus far (1.67 innings), Hong Chi Kuo has not dominated. He's gotten behind of hitters, and it's very difficult to succeed when you are pitching from behind. And yet, Kuo has such dominating stuff that allows for him to get behind hitters and still succeed. I disagree with Mattingly's decision to pull Kuo in the 8th inning of the 7-3 game in favor of Matt Guerrier with two outs and two on. While it ended up working out in the Dodgers' favor in large part because of Miguel Tejada's inability to not swing, Don Matttingly has to realize that Kuo is his best reliever and utilize him as such.
The rest - Matt Guerrier signed a lucrative 3-year contract with the Dodgers and so he will undoubtedly get a lot of important innings for the Blue Crew this year. Kenley Jansen gave up more runs on Saturday than he did the entire year last year. It's interesting how Mattingly will choose to allocate innings to Jansen. Will he defer to the "veteran" status of Guerrier and turn to him in the 7th inning or go with the better pitcher? Mike MacDougal appears to be the most effective as the "right-handed" specialist in the middle innings if he can keep his walks down. Vicente Padilla will be the wildcard of the Dodger bullpen as he can be the long-innings man or spot starter or the setup man. Hawksworth will most likely land the mop-up role upon Cormier's optioning to AAA (assuming Padilla remains healthy).
It appears that the Dodger starting rotation will be relatively better than the bullpen this year. It's a small sample size thus far but from the first four games, it appears as if Mattingly will give the benefit of the doubt to the starting pitcher in the 6th and 7th innings. It's too early to determine Mattingly's bullpen philosophy but I can't imagine it being much different to Torre's
Many have undertaken to draw up an account of their perspective of the 2011 Dodgers baseball season. Unlike any potential 2012 Republican presidential candidate, I am throwing my hat into the ring and will do my best to dissect this year's roster as dispassionately as possible. Here goes.
5. Jon Garland* (14-12, 3.47 ERA, 1.32 WHIP, $5 million)
*Injured
Only the most die-hard Dodger fan (Won Park) would claim that this year's Dodger starting rotation bests that of the reigning World Series Champion San Francisco Giants. A rotation of Lincecum, Cain, Sanchez, Bumgarner, and Zito is quite a formidable starting five, but can Kershaw, Billingsley, Kuroda, Lilly and Garland compete? Perhaps. Let's take a look.
Clayton Kershaw is poised to become a shining star this season. At $500,000 per year, he will be the lowest paid Opening Day starting pitcher and will get quite a significant pay raise when he is arbitration-eligible for the 2012 season. Kershaw was actually more hittable last year than he was in 2009, but he was able to go deeper into games and his K/BB ratio improved from 2.03 to 2.62. All signs point towards Kershaw having a "breakout" year if the Dodger offense can provide him with more offense than they have provided him with in the last two seasons. I'm bullish on Kershaw and predict a line of 18-8, 2.57 ERA, 1.16 WHIP.
Chad Billingsley reached a low point in his career in 2009 when he was bypassed in the playoff rotation in Game 3 of the NLCS against the Phillies in favor of Hiroki Kuroda, who missed the entire first round of the playoffs with a "bulging disk in his neck." In 2010, Billingsley had a pre-All star Game line of 7-4, 4.14 ERA, 1.39 WHIP as compared to a post-All star Game line of 5-7, 3.00 ERA, 1.17 WHIP. Billingsley was a beneficiary of generous run support in the first half but the law of averages caught up with him in the second half. Is he poised to capitalize on his successful second half run in 2011? In 2009, Billingsley was an All-Star but completely collapsed in the second half. The question is whether Billingsley can put together a string of 32 consistent starts. As much as I'd like to give Chad Billingsley the benefit of the doubt, I'm skeptical. The most likely scenario is that he will have roughly the same year that he had last year. I predict a line of 13-13, 3.56 ERA, 1.29 WHIP.
Hiroki Kuroda gave up five runs on eight hits in his six plus innings, walking one and striking out four, against the Rockies in penultimate spring training start of 2011. One should expect Kuroda to regress some after a rather stellar performance last year that included a near no-no against the Phillies on August 30th. When Shane Victorino came up in the 9th, I knew that he'd be the little jashik to break up Kuroda's bid, but I digress. I expect Kuroda to regress some from last year and predict a line of 12-14, 3.78 ERA, 1.25 WHIP.
Ted Lilly posted some great numbers last year. In fact, he had a sub-1.00 WHIP for the Dodgers. But, for some reason, I can't really get too enthused about what Ted Lilly will do in 2011. I hope I'm wrong, it seems as if everything has to go right for Lilly to pitch well. It seems as if there exists the potentiality of a massive breakdown when Lilly's on the mound. He's a soft-tossing lefty that relies on a lot of smoke and mirrors. A Jamie Moyer. I'm predicting a line of 11-15, 4.13 ERA, 1.28 WHIP.
As for the 5th starter slot, it appears as if Jon Garland's injury won't prevent him from missing too many starts. Jon Ely figures to get the nod to temporarily replace him. Perhaps the Dodgers will be ultra-cautious with Garland as his contract includes a 2012 option that automatically vests if he pitches 190 innings this year. It appears unlikely that he will reach that mark if he can't stay healthy the entire year. I predict a line of 10-7, 3.88 ERA, 1.35 WHIP.
Having a random thoughts entry is an exercise in lazy writing. Rather than coming up with some sort of coherent theme with which to write by, all I have to do is simply create some commentary on something that comes to my head.
For some reason, I really wanted to post this xanga entry. I could probably write tons of pages about the recent Dodger playoffs, but I'll spare you, the reader, from too extensive of an analysis. That said, I must talk Dodgers and I must talk baseball. To not do so would be repressing my random thoughts.
I watched Mike Scioscia pull John Lackey in the 7th inning, 2 outs and the bases loaded. I read Lackey's lips and I completely agreed with him. Wrong call, Sosh.
And yet, Torre made much more questionable decisions that cost the Dodgers. His decision to let Wolf hit for himself in Game 4 in the top of the 6th inning was absolutely unjustifiable. This was the perfect spot for Thome. I was ready to put on my White Sox Thome jersey that I got on clearance during the Chicago portion of my All-You-Can-Fly JetBlue period. 12 flights. Long Beach to San Jose. San Jose to Long Beach. Long Beach to Chicago. Chicago to Long Beach. Long Beach to Boston. Boston to Baltimore. Washington, D.C. to New York. New York to Long Beach. Long Beach to San Francisco. San Francisco to Long Beach. Long Beach to San Jose. San Jose to Long Beach.
Susan was probably a little tired from all the flying. She only took 9 flights herself, but that's still a lot. In fact, she's sleeping right next to me on the couch she got on Craigslist because she's so tired. Unrelated, but she's still averse to the idea of flying anytime soon. We are going to Houston in two weeks though for Al's wedding. But, that's it. For now.
With all the flying that I've done, it's imperative to have someone who is able to take you and pick you up from the airport. Preferably, it'd have to be someone who a) lives close to Long Beach, b) doesn't mind driving, c) reliable, d) was your best man, and e) is Filipino.
We've indirectly compensated Leo by providing him with mass quantities of meat. For NLDS Game 1, we fed him some chadol. For NLDS Game 2, it was kalbi. And for NLCS Game 4, it was OmahaSteak burgers and hot dogs. And, when I saw we, I mean Susan, of course.
That's it for now. It's nearing midnight and it's time for this 30 year old, married man to turn in for the night.
