I’m on the hunt for the perfect chair. I’ve been in my apartment for two months and am determined not to buy a chair until I find the perfect one.
Model 164 lounge chair designed by Arne Vodder produced by France & Son, Denmark, early 60s.
[Editor’s Note: I originally wrote this blog post in April. After 4 months of searching I gave up on finding the perfect chair. I still don’t have a chair at home, only a bench, a block of wood, a bay window and a bed.]
An audacious claim, I’m aware. But once you read the below I have no doubt that you will agree.
- My standing desk is made out of a gorgeous half-finished block of wood and 12 packs of imported beer. I haven’t yet determined if it works with domestics, 30 racks, etc.
- I only realized I needed a standing desk once an ultra-marathoner who was in our office critiqued the gangster lean I use when sitting in my nice office chair, which is made of neither wood nor beer.
- That night, I was gearing up for a long, expensive quest for the perfect standing desk when I designed and built this standing desk in the course of two minutes.
- This standing desk has a 180 degree view out my bay window.
- This standing desk literally puts my MacBook Air on a pedestal, as Steve Jobs originally intended.
- When I finish my work, I can put half my desk on the ground and sit on it while drinking the other half of the desk.
The hedonic treadmill, also known as hedonic adaptation, is the supposed tendency of humans to quickly return to a relatively stable level of happiness despite major positive or negative events or life changes.
The hedonic (or happiness) set point is a recently developed theory that requires further research. So far it illuminates an important facet of happiness and its homeostatic nature due to temperament. Less like a treadmill (which always tends towards one direction) and more like a thermostat (a negative feedback system), humans generally maintain a constant level of happiness throughout their lives - despite events that occur their own environment. The constancy is not nearly perfect, however; research tends to support a three-factor model, where our level of happiness is 50% determined by genetics, 10% determined by outside circumstances, and 40% determined by intentional activities.  That last factor, of intentional activities, is the focus ofpositive psychology, especially because not all activities are equally effective at helping one to reach the higher end of their happiness range.
[I don’t know if the literature on this is valid, but at face value this seems reasonable. Wikpedia for the win.]
“Today we ornament ourselves with goods and services more to make an impression on other people’s minds than to enjoy owning a chunk of matter—a fact that renders “materialism” a profoundly misleading term for much of consumption. Many products are signals first and material objects second.”—
from Spent by Geoffrey Miller by way of the svpply blog
So true! I don’t get to see my peeps in person nearly often enough, so I really rely on my digital representation. One thing that’s so interesting about this “post-materialism” (sorry) is that authenticity transcends the virtual world / real world divide. As I said in my post about J.Crew, you can’t sacrifice authenticity as you innovate on these things. Fake Nikes are fake Nikes whether you are wearing them or posting them on your blog.
“The human mind is built to think in terms of narratives…in turn, much of human motivation comes from living through a story of our lives, a story that we tell to ourselves and that creates a framework of our motivation. Life could be just ‘one damn thing after another’ if it weren’t for such stories. The same is true for confidence in a nation, a company, or an institution.”—Economists Robert J. Schiller & George A. Akerloff
Today at work they gave me a Swedish Princess cake. You know, bavarian cream with white cake and strawberries and covered with marizpan fondant.
Sophia Cui only joined the team on Monday, but I knew she got it when she tweeted on her second day: “Big Sean reminds me of a poor man’s Drake”. So true. Anyway, she knew what I was really thinking about:
The ambiance! Raw soul samples, crunch drums, the crazy Ghostface slang. Does’t dissapoint. Also, if you’re not following @ghostfacekillah you’re missing out, occassionally he’ll do 15 consecutive tweets expounding on something like, friends who don’t tell you you have a booger in your nose.
I like Big K.R.I.T. He’s thoughtful without being a preachy “conscious” rapper. And the flow is nice.
Just like Amy Winehouse but without the bouncy backing band, its quieter music. I really like her though, she’s incredibly talented.
Curren$y is one of my favorite rappers, so I was excited for this collaboration with producer Alchemist. But I actually don’t like this mixtape, its too much of a departure from the other stuff. Curren$y is so unique —- his flow, his beats, the non-cliche worldview that he conveys in his lyrics. But it felt like a different dude on this mixtape…
I thought Joe Budden fell off the face of the earth, but I he resurfaced recently in Slaughterhouse, Eminem’s new rap posse. I liked Joe Budden in 2003 when he was first becoming popular, I thought his rhymes were interesting and it was appealing how open he was about his terrible angel dust addiction. This mixtape is super depressing though, like emo music written by someone with grown up problems.
Clipse were the nicest. The banging Neptunes beats, the non-stop quotables, and perhaps the best French pronunciation in the whole rap game : “Champs Elysees”, “Christian LaCroix”, they make it sound easy!