Anonymity Therapy

Officially known as the 'Witness Protection Program.' Unofficially, it should be considered a form of therapy.

I see value in being forced to live amongst the unfamiliar. There are too many mental triggers that go off when you look at a familiar street name, a coffee shop, or the same face that serves you coffee every morning, on the dot. I sometimes cannot glance down a street I frequent without being overcome with a feeling of obligation - to what, I can't always pinpoint - that serves as a reminder that I am tied to, needed by, even the things I consider to have little immediate value to my daily agenda.

Anonymity is the tool that allows us to be introspective; instead of imprisoning ourselves up in a dark room and meditating, or attempting to procure a slice of silence throughout our day so we can 'think' to ourselves, we can do the same so long as nobody recognizes us and every element of our environment is foreign to our five senses.

I'd like to try this out by taking a small boat in the middle of the ocean, which I think is currently the only compromise, but I'm sure the Coast Guard would interrupt my therapy session.

(Middle) Ground (Zero)

I sat through a talk yesterday - ok, I stood, as "host" - given by a prominent Bay Area entrepreneur. I listened. I took mental notes as furiously as I saw pens scribbling and laptop keys transcribing wisdom-nuggets. The room was packed with Charles Schwab and Suze Orman proteges. I was disappointed at what I heard.

There has been a slow death of the Opinion and a rise in the Middle Ground, the compromise that tries to keep all ears happy and appears to be the more intellectually superior alternative to the stereotypically narrow scope of the lone opinion. That's a shame; I'm surrounded by Middle Ground these days: reversible clothing, interdisciplinary majors, "full-service" services, sweet & sour. Come on, the "breakfast sandwich" ? I can't remember the last time I heard a solid, abrasive opinion. Are people too exhausted to defend their viewpoints? Can we outsource that task, too?

During the Q&A session I heard many honest, specific questions. I'm of the belief that specific questions deserve specific answers, useful or not, intellectual-sounding or not, because a vague response that covers the spectrum of possible responses is of no more use than a rhetorical question given as the response itself.

The climax of irony for the evening: "I don't like to take risks."
- (visiting entrepreneur)

I wonder if the speaker was able to delegate risk-taking for the past 25 years and what risk-evading venture capitalists fund middle-ground ventures. Maybe the fact that I can't think of any says enough. Really, what tech venture (the speaker's company) is stuck at 'startup' status after 11 years? I should've asked, "Does Moore's Law stutter?"