Initial File Source: http://www.nobelprize.org/mediaplayer/index.php?id=1072 Output: Prize Lecture by Paul Krugman So, thank you, thanks to the Academy, thanks to everyone here, as you all know it’s an extraordinary thing. In this lecture I want to be in part a little retrospective, talk about the creation of these theories but I also thought it should be a bit more than that and talk to some extent about the relevance of these theories to what’s happening now and in particular to some of the pressing problems we are having actually in parts of the world even now. Of course recent events are dominated by financial crisis but there also is a real source of the problems that has a fair bit to do although in a perverse way which I’ll explain, with some of the issues that I and others spent much of the past quarter century working on. So, let me spend a little while… Actually here’s an outline of where I intend to go. Let me first talk about why we needed this theory, why we needed to change the way we thought about international trading and then talk about how that through a kind of inexorable logic leads you to think differently about the geography of production within country as well as trade. And then I’ll try to talk about what’s happening, and everything old is new again, and then I’ll explain what that’s about when we get there. So let me start by talking about trade and as it was thought about for about a hundred and sixty years after David Ricardo’s classic analysis. How economists thought about trade, how it was certainly taught when I was at graduate school. And it was story about countries trading because they were different, the classic case was wheat and wine, Britain selling wheat to Portugal and importing wine in return, climate differences, but of course it could be differences in technological competence, could be differences in resources, the skill level of your labor force or the amount of capital that you accumulated. And of course that theory remains an important story about world trade today. If you go back to the early years of the 20th century, it was a very good story about trade as a whole, so if we want long-term perspectives, let’s just look at what Britain’s trade looked like on the eve of World War I. What did Britain do? Well, exported manufactured goods, the non-manufactured included a fair bit of coal, it imported food and some manufactured goods but they were generally very primitive manufactures, only a few things that were imported were sophisticated manufactured goods, and your story about Britain was it was the workshop of the world, it was skilled and manufacturing, it had competence at that, it had a comparative advantage in manufacturing. And, on the other hand, it was short on land, short on raw materials, so it imported raw materials. Very much a classical view of trade, comparative advantage, no problem. This is the kind of trade that economic models understood very easily. But if we go forward around 80 years to the 1990s, well Britain basically exported manufactured goods and imported manufactured goods. Anyway, there must be a clear difference between the types of goods that Britain exported and the type that it imported, but actually not so much. Automobiles not such a good example right now, because no one is actually selling any automobiles, but two-way trade in automobiles between countries, two-way trade of machine tools (mumbles) the amount of two-way trade, and I’ll show you a little bit more of that in a second, and very lack of a clear pattern, and very much importing and exporting of the same kinds of goods. Also, there was a change in the countries with whom Britain traded. So this is the comparison again circa 1910 and by the 1990s ROW, the rest of world, sorry, economists’ abbreviations. So, if we look at 1910, Britain although did trade with other European countries, actually the bulk of its trade was with places further afield. Its trade was with India for tea, with United States or Canada for wheat. It was a trade of countries that had different climates or very different abundances of land or very differences in natural resources. There was a kind of trade between the complementary countries, was the way the world worked. But if we’d look now, Britain primarily exports to its European neighbors. As European neighbors are from the economists’ point of view virtually undistinguishable from Great Britain – same level of technological competences, same education level of the workforce. Basically, trading with countries that are very much like yourself. If I would expand this to include trade with other high-income countries it would be a vast bulk of Britain straight or a little bit less now than it was 15 years ago. And that is actually an important story. These are very informal measures. We can get more formal. As it happens, this year’s World Development Report from the World Bank is focused on economic geography.
Initial File Source: http://www.versio2.com/blog/social-media-strategy-video-interview-with-kamales-lardi Output: Social Media Strategy: Video Interview with Kamales Lardi Transcript: Interviewer: Hi and welcome to our webcasts! Thanks very much for attending today. I think we have very interesting time ahead of us here with Kamales Lardi, who I’m very happy to have as our partner today. Took a little while to arrange this interview. So, here we are with Kamales. Would you like to introduce yourself and talk a little bit about what you do? Kamales Lardi: Hello everyone! Thank you, Stephan. Yes, it took a little bit of time but I think it was worth to wait, no? So, I have been in management consulting for about more than 12 years and I focused on strategy and business process optimization. I started working on social technology project somewhere around 2007 and I’ve consulted with companies in Europe and Asia, such as UBS, Zurich Insurance, Bacardi Martini and many other companies. What I do is basically help companies identify how they can utilize social technologies across their business value chain and create sustainable returns form these technologies. Interviewer: Ok, it sounds very valuable and very interesting. Let me just ask you… You know, social media is, of course, totally pervasive nowadays and yet there seems to be somewhat of a gap between how individuals use social media, especially the younger generation but really all generations nowadays and how companies apply it. Why do you think companies need a social media strategy? Kamales Lardi: Uhm… That’s actually a good question. For me, social media has kind of developed organically over time and it’s slowly become an important channel for businesses, and at the beginning many companies started to use it as part of the exploration phase to identify, this was a valid channel and at the beginning there was a lot of questioning about whether this was just a hype. What I can tell is basically that social media has changed the way people communicate with each other and with organizations as well, so it’s become a part of our daily lives today, and we cannot ignore that fact when we look at how business will operate as well. So, many companies started to look at, you know, the kind of tactical use of social media, creating a Facebook page, creating an account on Twitter and things like that and exploring its uses in terms of how to get market, broadcast their marketing messages. They’ve also focused on measurements that look at things like channel engagement and content. As a result of this, I think many companies have had a road block because at a certain point they aren’t able to derive sustainable benefits from their social media initiatives and they no longer obtain benefits from that because they are not linked to business objectives basically. And so, when you look at social media strategy, it really involves understanding what your business is and who your target audiences are and what channels your customers are using and really trying to understand how social technologies can be utilized to reach your business objectives. In the beginning companies started (unclear) tactical approach because this was a new technology and I think it made a lot of sense as well to start using social media for marketing and so on, but as we move on and as social technology gets more accepted within our business environment as a valid marketing or a valid strategic channel to the market, we need to look at how we can apply it for longer term sustainable value. Interviewer: Ok, so, now there are of course many ways in which you could approach a strategic view of social media, you’ve also posted just yesterday an interesting article on LinkedIn that really kind of shocked me in that it told me that social media is more than just for marketing? Kamales Lardi: Oh dear, sorry to shock you but I truly do believe that, I think that companies that look at social media just from a marketing prospective tend to limit the potential they can get out of it. By looking at it as a strategic channel and looking at the entire business value chain they can be actually more creative in the ways they apply these technologies. You can pretty much apply it in any part of your business as long as you have a good understanding of the value these channels can bring or the potential that they can bring. So, that involves really having good understanding of your own business, what kind of business challenges you’re facing and how these channels can be utilized to support these business objectives or to face these challenges. And it also involves having good understanding of who your target audiences are. So these could be your customers, that you are trying to reach, or it could even be your internal employees as your target audiences. So, I do believe that social media has a limitless potential as long as you understand your business well and you are creative and have understanding how to imply these technologies. Interviewer: So, Kamales, just name a few of the other areas that people may be are not so familiar with, within which social media does have an application. I noticed, you’ve mentioned places like operations and so forth, and you just talk a little bit more about some of these other non-traditional areas for social media
Initial File Source: http://www.thewho.info/JAETheRock.htm Output: Ten thirty in the morning: The Phone rang on my bedside table. On a normal day the phone would have fallen across the room at 100 m.p.h. But this was no normal day. This was the day my band “The Rock” were to sign our recording contract. After eighteen months of recording in my studio in Gloucestershire, and several changes of band personell. The album was finished, mixed, and the record deal sewn up. I put the phone to my ear expecting to hear my wake up call. It was my manager Bill Curbishleys voice instead. “Are you sitting down?” he asked. “No – actually I’m lying down?” I replied. “Good - that’s even better” he continued. “You’re not gonna believe this”, my heart dropped. ‘The record company got arrested by the FBI this morning, their assets (money) had been frozen – the deals off”. I laughed, (but) he wasn’t joking. (And) It took way over a year before the record company ‘was exonerated, by which time “The Rock” no longer existed. I’d tried financing the band for a few more months but it became obvious the “Music Business” were wary of taking on a band that had been dropped on the day of signing (by their record company). We finally decided on a make or break tour of the US for seven weeks. The shows were great but no record deal resulted as the Band reluctantly broke up. But even to the present day, we never lost our Faith in the Album. So – damn the record companies, - what the fuck do they know anyway. Here’s the album – the signed limited edition of “THE ROCK” - PLAY IT LOUD
Initial File Source: http://futurebook.mit.edu/category/guest-blog/page/2/ Output: A Book about Books, p.10 The evil that men write, lives after them. This, which Montaigne said in his haste, many a callow ready-writer repeats glibly at his leisure, and a commodity of yea-forsooth cynics, fit for treasons, stratagems, and spoils, now scrawl fragrantly above the portals of one of the most tranquil and leafy byways of belles lettres the sour legend, “Abandon hope, all ye who enter here”. Nevertheless, fear not, gentle reader. Let out latter-day Zál and Rustum bluster as they will, but heed not thou. With us along the strip of herbage strown, That just divides the desert from the sown, Where name of pope and pressman is forgot, And peace to Montaigne on his purple throne. To return to the knight of Bordeaux. That is a quaint distinction which he implies. Of commentators there are swarms; of authors great scarcity! A commentator, then, is not an author. He who interprets placket holes, devil worship, the Scandinavian myths, or (…).
Initial File Source: http://www.thewho.info/JAETheRock.htm Translation: В десять тридцать утра позвонил телефон на моей тумбочке. В обычный день телефон летел бы через всю комнату со скоростью 100 миль/час. Но это был не обычный день. В этот день моя группа "Рок" подписывала контракт с компанией звукозаписи. После восемнадцати месяцев записи в студии в Глостершире и нескольких изменений в команде, альбом был закончен, сведен и сделка близилась к завершению. Я приложил телефон к уху в надежде услышать будильник. Это был голос моего менеджера Билла Кёрбишлейса. "Ты сидишь? ", -спросил он. "Нет, на самом деле я лежу",- ответил я. "Хорошо - это даже лучше", - продолжил он. "Ты не поверишь", мое сердце ушло в пятки. "Звукозаписывающая компания арестована ФБР, утром их активы (деньги) заморозили - сделка сорвана". Я засмеялся, но он не шутил. Почти через год звукозаписывающая компания была реабилитирована, но к этому времени группа "Рок " уже не существовала. Я пытался финансировать группу несколько месяцев, но стало очевидно, что "Музыкальный Бизнес" опасался связываться с группой, которую кинула звукозаписывающая компания в день подписания контракта. Мы наконец решились сделать семинедельный тур по США «или получится, или мы уходим». Шоу были отличными, но подписание контракта так и не состоялось, и группа неохотно рассталась. Но до последнего дня мы никогда не теряли веры в свой альбом. Так что к черту звукозаписывающие компании то, в конце концов – что, блин, они понимают? Вот альбом – подписанная лимитированная серия группы «Рок» - СДЕЛАЙТЕ ПОГРОМЧЕ!