There has long been an outcry against "puppy mills" and "back yard breeders" (BYB) and the retail pet shops that sell dogs and cats. The biggest reason cited is the end game for far too many dogs and cats – they end up at publicly funded animal shelters, fail to be adopted by a new family and are euthanized. The "solutions" proposed by activists range from shutting down the puppy mills to neutering every dog and cat. These strategies are similar to the "war on drugs" - focusing primarily on the source and suppliers and not so much on the demand. While "puppy mills" and BYB are not yet outlawed like narcotics, this strategy is still doomed to failure despite any minor victories. Witness the 40+ years campaign against drug abuse - we're no closer to ending it.

Another analogy might be: There are too many cars on the road causing traffic congestion - let's stop making new cars and make everyone buy used cars! This is kinda like forcing pet shops to stop selling puppies and offer shelter animals for adoption. (more on this later)

Activists need to also address the demand side of pet ownership. There is a large demand for puppies that greatly exceed the supply of puppies from "reputable" professional breeders. Even conscientious owners have difficulty locating choice pets to adopt. My guess from talking to other dog owners is that most pets are bought at pet shops supplied by "puppy mills" - with a small percentage adopted from shelters and rescue groups. In our consumer-driven, on-demand culture, people flock to pet shops for ready to take home puppies. What you see is what you get - a shiny new puppy! It's easy, quick, convenient - and pleasant.

Let's compare the pet shop experience to what the activists advocate. Even at the best no-kill shelters, the animals are not easily accessible and not as adorable. Animals are kept in cold, utilitarian pens behind bars. Shelters are not located in malls and shopping centers and they're usually associated with abandoned or lost pets, often with behavioral and health issues. They're usually under-staffed and under-funded. Volunteers often seem to relate more with the animals than with any potential adopting family. If an animal didn't have behavioral issues before, they usually develop them from the experience of being abandoned by their former owner and being in a shelter. Usually they develop abandonment issues - they won't let you out of their sight - and they become un-housebroken. I've done this - twice. Adopting a shelter dog is like buying a used car - more than likely you are unknowingly inheriting someone else's problems.

Getting your pet from a professional, reputable breeder is even more challenging. First, you need to find the breeder for the breed you are interested in. You need to develop a relationship with the breeder over time - so that you can be put on a waiting list to be considered when the next litter of pups are ready. If you're lucky the breeder is just a few hours drive away, but usually they are in another state and you purchase the pet and it's shipped to you. (Ironically, the more difficult a state makes it for a professional breeder, the more likely the pets are supplied from out-of-state breeders - and hence, the existence of puppy mills). Furthermore, reputable breeders are selective about who they sell to - which simply drives the "unqualified" buyers to pet shops and BYBs.

Why is there such a demand for puppies? Other than Cesar Millan's Dog Whisperer, almost all other media portraits of dog ownership shows only the joys of owning a dog - from unwrapping a puppy inside a gift box to dogs rescuing humans, the popular belief is that dog is man's best friend. First time dog owners just don't anticipate all the training their new pet will require - even basic housebreaking. But heck, even with shelter dogs, you have to housebreak them all over again.

Dogs in movies & tv shows have undergone extensive training, so they seem so wonderful, obedient and intelligent. But training is something that many dog owners are not willing to invest much time in. As a result, we have plenty of untrained, misbehaving dogs. Worse, without proper training, many dogs end up being abused out of frustration by their owners. Of those owners who simply accept their dog's nature, many annoy their neighbors by keeping their dogs outside for hours and hours - resulting in annoying barking and public nuisances. Eventually, some of these owners give up their dogs for one reason or another - moving to a new place that doesn't accept pets, can't afford the vet bills, etc. How do we address the real reasons dogs end up in shelters?

Solutions:

Dog Registration - is not the whole solution. Like driving a car, pet owners ought to be licensed - required to take classes and pass a basic exam before owning a dog. In this way, more pet owners will be better prepared to deal with the realities of pet ownership and less likely to abandon pets to shelters.

Shelters need to do a better job - each animal needs to be thoroughly checked and trained to address any behavioral problems. Full disclosure needs to be made to potential adopters. Offer free basic training classes for first time dog owners. Compete with the retail experience: offer a free vet exam and health warranty with every pet adopted. Charge a higher adoption fee if you have to to cover costs - if someone can't afford the fee, they probably can't afford to keep the dog healthy. Or partner with pet shops - get your "product" in front of customers.

Puppy Mills: Regulate them better, limit their size, provide oversight. This doesn't necessarily have to be a government expense. It could be a private certification company that regulates the industry, sanctioned by the government - breeders get certified in order to sell animals to pet shops.

Replace puppy mills with organized networks of professional breeders that can produce quality pets humanely and meet demands of the market. Maybe there can be breeder co-ops that can make the process of meeting market demand more efficient.

I'm not an expert on this humongous multi-billion dollar industry - just a dog owner, so I may be wrong about some aspects - but I don't see sustainable solutions being proposed that can really make a difference. I only see activists advocating ineffective tactics and addressing only the supply side of the equation.

 

In this strange world of ours, we have consolidation and specialization. Who knew 50 years ago that one could open a cafe selling just coffees worldwide, or just smoothies, or just frozen yogurt, or just pretzels,... you get the idea. And then we have stores like Target now selling everything including groceries, or Costco selling furniture and appliances and apparel and food and wines.

Well, as advance as cars get - gas, diesel, hybrid, plug-in electric... the old car wash is still the same, pretty much. Though now there are car washes that just do exterior, I wish there was one that does... just WHEELS! The wheels on my cars always get dirty first - from the brake dust, mostly. If there was a place that would wash only the wheels, and wash them really well - I'd probably go almost every week.

Here's my ideal schedule:

Wheels - every week
Exterior - every two-three weeks
Interior - every month or two

As it is, I go about once a month for the standard wash, and live with dirty wheels for 3 of the 4 weeks.

I was even thinking of some invention - an automatic wheel cleaner that would be able to really scrub the grime off wheels. It should be able to sense the size, orientation and design of the wheels and optimize it's cleaning process. Maybe such a device has many motorized brushes and water jets. Maybe it even has optical sensors to figure out where the grime is thickest or most stubborn. Or maybe it's some other approach - like steam jets coming from an array of nozzles that can be computer controlled. You'd think with facial recognition possible today, one could do a variation that would recognize how many spokes, or "topology" of the wheel, and other geometric factors that informs how a wheel is best cleaned - which way to point nozzles or brushes, etc.

Taking this concept further, maybe a car wash can be a super service station. They can offer dent repair, scratch repair, minor services - such as check the oil and fluid, change or top-off, etc. It seems like many car washes make profits from the gift shop/snack foods they sell to customers while they wait for their cars. How about adding more car-related services?

-J

It seems that there is ever increasing and overwhelming complexity in so many things today, there must be a better way. Everything is overly legal and strife with fine print, and every company has different terms. For example, just look at the myriad of air fares - it seems like no two tickets from the same airline even have the same terms, much less pricing!

What if there was a virtual citizenship you could opt-in on - in which you would pledge to abide by one standard simplified rules and regulations? and companies who wish to do business with you would also opt-in and agree to abide by those same standard rules and regulations? Most likely, participation would have to be backed by some kind of legally binding contract in order to have real meaning, but maybe in the beginning, it can be some very simple things about return policies, disclosures, credit terms, etc. Maybe there is an arbitration board involved to settle disputes. But the core idea is to have very clear, across the board rules of conduct and avoid misunderstandings, surprises, and ultimately, litigation, fraud and other costly, non-productive, abusive behaviors on both sides.

What if participating businesses offered incentives to participants? They could still do business with non-participants, but participants may get different treatment. In some ways, its like a membership - like a Costco membership where your transactions fall under Costco's rules instead of individual manufacturers and brands. But it can go further, and be opened to more things than just retail relationships. It could include contracts between employers and employees, vendors and contractors, etc.

What if...

Ok, it's an exaggerated claim that profits are evil. They aren't, of course, but solely focusing on profits can make people and companies - and investors - do evil things. In the name of profit, they outsource jobs, fire employees, cut corners on products and services, charge extra fees, shirk responsibility.

Unfortunately, the greed of Wall Street has spread and become main street's mantra. Greed can be a powerful motivator, but left unchecked, it is NOT good. The singular focus on profit as the only measure of success has denigrated all other measures into near oblivion. Integrity, morality, fairness, creativity, innovation, quality of life - these are all characteristics that profit-seekers often scoff at or at least willing to sacrifice on the altar of profitability. People cite profit as if it's a redeeming value for all other failures. For example, Microsoft is making billions in profits, so it's not a failure - despite scores of very public failures in a wide variety of product markets. Conversely, the lack of profits, is deemed a failure. Heck, even declining profits is seen as a failure.

Even non-profits cite how much donations as a measure of their own success, never mind what actual good they do. Artists and filmmakers cite box office sales as the sole measure of their art's success. Everything has a price tag. And the higher the number, the higher the belief that the underlying item is of value and good, never mind that it may simply be a failure on all other fronts and contribute nothing to society or culture - or worse.

This singular focus on profit and revenue should not be applied to everything. It is not the path to salvation. It is not the path to happiness. It is not the path to health and prosperity for society as a whole. It can be divisive - have and have nots - and often destructive. Not everything should be developed for multi-million dollar profits. Going public and making gazillions should not be the only measure of a company's worth to society.

This is a plot idea that starts from the end of the new Battlestar Galactica where the Colonial fleet and the Cylon rebels, having teamed up, find Earth. There was some mysterious revelation that the human inhabitants of Earth share genetic similarities with Cylons. So what happened? Earth has been destroyed in a nuclear holocaust before the arrival of the Colonialist and Cylons. It is a bitter ending to an epic journey. Here is my idea for a "prequel" and continuing story.

(First draft)

1. Earth before holocaust:Humans are increasingly being plagued by cancer and related diseases. Medical science has advanced to the point where almost any disease - including cancer - can be prevented through genetic manipulation. The governments of the world have decided to embark on a mass vaccination program to bring this genetic "cure" to all citizens of Earth - and reduce spiraling healthcare costs. However, various subgroups of humans resist the movement to manipulate the human genome - the religious believe it is an abomination of God's earth and creation, other scientists worry about the unintended consequences of such large scale genetic experimentation. Yet another group (the naturalists) believes that letting nature run her course is the best. Protests by these groups become more strident and frequent as plans are revealed by more and more governments - some politicians push for making vaccination mandatory in the name of public welfare and improvement to the human condition (their political campaigns funded by the bio-pharma companies that stand to benefit immensely).

Meanwhile, the large, powerful bio-pharma corporations are battling for market share of the genetic vaccination - using politics, marketing, legal wrangling to position themselves to lock in marketshare and profits. Some bio-pharma companies are taking the wholesale approach - that is, releasing engineered viruses on the general population to distribute the "cure" - it's the quickest and lowest cost approach. Other bio-pharma companies support voluntary distribution - through clinics and drugstores who normally dispense "flu shots". (It was discovered that the influenza virus has been randomly manipulating the populations genome already, and hence the effort to harness this natural phenomenon for intentional purposes).

One bio-pharma decides to stop a competitor by funding an extreme group of anti-genetic manipulation, fueling the fervor to violent means. These radicalized groups embark on a campaign of terror upon the targeted bio-pharma competitor labs. A scientist at one of the destroyed labs, his family targeted and killed, decides to join the radical group in an effort to influence them. They take him as a prisoner and think that using him as a spokesman will help their cause. (He brings with him some key technology to genetically engineer viruses, along with some top-secret military samples, unknown to the radical group's leaders.)

Meanwhile, another group, the naturalists, have been able to gain information about some top-secret extraterrestrial communications. Through one of the project's team members, they are able to arrange a meeting with the "research vessel". The research vessel had been hailing for assistance, after having been damaged. It turns out the research vessel is far off course, having entered a worm hole unintentionally while investigating it. The alien research vessel is from the 12 colonies. The crew has been decimated, and only a few members have survived.
This group of naturalists has much support in the future version of NASA, as the scientists are well aware of the risks of wholesale genetic manipulation - and they have been working to gather evidence to support a voluntary, more cautious distribution of any genetic manipulation agents.

In a mis-guided effort to reach out (or was it?) - the bio-pharma with the "aerosol" vaccine (think anthrax spores) - arranges to meet with one of the radical groups opposing them to address their concerns and educate them - believing that the fear was due to ignorance of the actual science. In the tension filled meeting where the group tours the laboratories, a prototype sample of the vaccine is accidentally released and everyone is "infected/cured". It turns out that the prototype sample contains genetic code developed by the military that facilitates genetic cloning and growth of replacement organs. It was used to ensure genetic stability in the prototype vaccine production, and was meant to be removed prior to mass-production.

At some point, the Earth scientist are able to "rescue" the alien research vessel - but it's damaged self-defense system inadvertently arms and begins to target a nearby earth defense satellite. An escalation ensues and a nuclear holocaust is triggered. The Earth survivors - on the alien vessel and in the lab deep underground on Earth, are amongst the survivors. A rescue effort brings these humans together in the underground lab, but they have all been infected with the prototype virus at one point or another. Some of the survivors are badly injured, having been exposed to radiation and other physical injuries - paralysis.

The scientists begin to sample their own DNA to monitor the progress of the viral infection and it's effect on their genes. They find a secret military lab section in their search for additional survivors. There they find a cloning lab where they can clone new organs to replace the radiation damaged ones. Shockingly, they find a hidden lab where whole, cloned bodies are being grown. After much debate, they decide to try to clone some of the survivors in order to give them new bodies.

Meanwhile, other survivors begin to reorganize. Some believe that the nuclear attack was a deliberate attempt by anarchists, terrorists. Military leaders, in a paranoid state, begin a campaign to seize control and hunt down those responsible for the attacks - believing it was the alien vessel that was responsible. They begin to treat some of the Earth scientist with suspicion - thinking the alien humans have brainwashed them or are using them for a secret agenda to take control of Earth.

The military embarks on a secret mission to take over the alien vessel to gain access to valuable navigation data and harness it's technology (FTL drives) for their own use. They instruct an artificial intelligence computer to help them analyze the alien system, believing that it was sent to spy on Earth as a precursor to a plan to invade. The military decide on an ambitious pre-emptive strike on the colonial worlds.

When the scientists learn of this secret mission, they begin devising a plan to thwart the military. A group of them return to the alien vessel to warn them and try to secure them from a military force to overtake the vessel. A battle ensues, the Colonial crew is killed, but the alien vessel is able to jump out of Earth's orbit, but not before a nuclear missile is fired at it and misses, but striking the Earth, this time triggering global meltdown.

Season 2:
The alien research vessel is bound for Colonial space with the Earth humans on board. However, they are intercepted by the Cylons. The Earth humans do not know that the Cylons are exiled from the Colonies. They attempt a peaceful introduction, and try to teach them human morals and ethics. Human monothiestic religion is even introduced to the Cylons. But the paranoid Cylons believe they were sent by the Colonials as spies. The Earth humans are eventually imprisoned by the Cylons, but find kinship in the A.I. that was installed by the Earth military. A dormant "trojan horse" program in the A.I. comes to life when it detects that it has reached Colonial space and convinces the Cylons that a pre-emptive strike on the Colonies is the only way to ensure their survival.

The Earth humans agree to a cloning program as a way to extend their lifespan and cure their various diseases, but the Cylon and Earth AI use the cloning program as part of their preparation for an attack on the Colonial homeworlds. The original Earth humans are killed off one by one by the Cylons controlled by the AI and replaced by clones. These clones are the same 12 models as the ones in the existing series. Some are sent to the Colonies to infiltrate and gather intelligence.

There's this feature with instant messaging clients where you can set your status to show what song you are currently listening to in iTunes. Wouldn't it be great if your friends to could listen along as well? The new version of iTunes has Home Sharing - between the computers in your home network. I know, I could make a podcast - but that seems like a clear violation of copyright. I just want my friends to be able to listen to the songs at the same time I'm listening to them - I don't want to distribute the music files - but more like acting as a DJ for my own circle of friends - so we'd get into the mood of the songs. I want to stream the music to their computer, but not let them save it. Is there something like that currently?

OK, I just saw Google's Wave - a whole new paradigm to replace email - which is apparently something like 40 years old. The Wave is really cool and full of innovative features that may/will change the way people communicate and collaborate and share information.

However, I think the rest of us will still cling onto our emails, and twitter, and posterous, and blogs, and online photo albums for a while longer - even if just because most of the time, our needs are simpler. We don't need to always share every thought with everyone in our universe. So my version of Email 2.0 is simply a feature set that address some really nagging things for nearly everyone.

1. Spam/spoofing

2. Attachments

3. Organizing

Email should/could be made more spam proof. Instead of our inboxes being just open receptacles to anything sent our way, it should be more discriminatory - like the reception desk at your office. Your receptionist doesn't just let anyone come in and wait for you to come into your office. A visitor must first identify themselves, and give reason for their presence. The receptionist verifies their identity - looks at business card if first time. The visitor would state that they are here to meet Mr. John for a 2 pm meeting, for example. The receptionist verifies the appointment. Then the visitor can stay and wait for the meeting. There are no random visitors, no unsolicited salespeople who get in to meet you, unless you want to.

So Email 2.0 should verify the sender/visitor - show me some ID. The sender should give some reason for the message - ongoing subscription, friend, established business relationship, appointment, etc. Now this last reason would be interesting to explore - the "appointment" - which presupposes that some prior mutual arrangement had been made - and it's good for a one-time "visit" only - or any number of preset times. This would give the recipient a lot more control over which senders, for what reason, when and how often, rather than the current paradigm - which is that the sender is in control.

Attachments - the ability to attach files to emails is often abused. Many people don't consider file size before sending out, say a ppt presentation to everyone in the department. Or more maliciously, sending malware or viruses in a spam. Even on occasions when I have had to distribute a large file, I wish there were easier alternatives. I know that there are many ways currently - you can upload your file to a some file sharing service, get the link, and paste it into your email. Well - that's a huge barrier. It's not integrated. Email 2.0 should automatically, on the sender's end, deposit the attachments on a server and replace it with a link. That way, when you are sending a 5MB file to 10 people, it takes up only 5MB on a server somewhere, not 10 x 5MB = 50MB on email servers. The sender should have the option to secure the link to the file with a password or some other limit (download only once, expires after 30 days, etc.) The server should scan the file for validity and embedded viruses, malware, etc.

Organizing - most organizing occurs on the end-users mail client. Email 2.0 should support "rules" on the server, so that when I've already got rules that move, archive, or otherwise process my email when I use my laptop mail client - I get the same post-processed email on my iPhone. How annoying is it that I have to mark some emails as junk 2 or 3 times - once from each device I use - for example. The server end processing should also allow for automatically attaching tags or priority to certain email. Currently, most initial sorting is through the Subject line - and we all know how often the subject line has no relation to the actual contents, or even the sender.

I'm sure there are many more features that Email 2.0 should have. But these are the basic, fundamental ones that I think can really give us back control of our inboxes.

What do you think?