Being On To Something

Paul on writing songs with John

I constantly marvel at the brilliance of the songwriting collaboration between John Lennon and Paul McCartney.  I don't know if they ever wrote a bad song.  It boggles the mind.  I mean, everyone knows this, but it still blows me away every time I think about it.  Why did they ever break up?

So it was with great interest that I read a nice feature in the LA Times about Paul's new album, "Memory Almost Full," which he is releasing through Hear Music, the Starbuck's label.  The following passage, about "the days when it was easy to bend over a guitar with Lennon on the other rumpled bed and work magic on cue":

"We were writing 'She Loves You' because we'd been told by our manager
that we needed a single. And we were just, 'OK.' It was great. We just
responded well to direction. They'd say, 'You're going into studio
next week, so you'll need to write the album.' And we'd go, 'OK.' Ha!
Never once do I remember us going, 'A whole album in a week?' Which,
you know, we should've thought.

"But we go, 'Yeah, great, OK.' We were just so innocent and
enthusiastic. So yeah, that's what we did all the time. We wrote just
under 300 songs, and that was done in about 300 sessions. We never had
a dry session."

How could that be?

"Because we were bloody brilliant. Pure genius, that's all. 'We were
very good,' he said modestly,' " and he smiles for his failure to
conjure up the requisite humility. "The good thing is, now you can say
that. People used to say, 'Don't you think you're a bit conceited?'
And I'd say, 'I know what you mean, you could say it's conceited, but
I really do know we're good. I can feel it every time we write a
song.' Because John and I were very good collaborators. We really
helped each other massively and admired each other greatly."

He thinks for a moment. "It was a joy," he says.

Demand Response Systems and the Fourth Amendment

In the wake of the California energy crisis of 2000-2001, the California Energy Commission and California Public Utilities Commission are aggressively pursuing “demand response” energy programs aimed at reducing peak energy demand. Demand response systems convey information about market conditions through pricing or reliability signals to customers, who in turn, hopefully, alter their electricity consumption choices.  One complication with such systems is that they radically increase the amount of information about activities inside the home that the electricity company can see.  In California, for example, PG&E is installing smart meters that will send information in intervals ranging from 15 minutes to one hour.  This is 750-3000 times more information than the monthly meter read that has been the norm for many years.  And the law generally considers information held by utilities to be "business records," subject to far less privacy protections than information kept inside the home.  In other words, the police don't have to show probable cause and get a warrant in order to get them.   In an article published today in the Stanford Technology Law Review, Deirdre Mulligan and I argue that courts and policymakers should take "the long view" of technology that reveals information about activities inside the home, and give greater protection to such information -- whether it is held by utilities or by an individual.

USC Law School

I am On To USC.

Taking the "Long View" of the Fourth Amendment

I gave a talk on Friday at Stanford regarding the Fourth Amendment implications of the new energy technologies coming down the pike such as advanced meters and programmable communicating thermostats. (Legalese translation:  Fourth Amendment implications = whether law enforcement can use the technologies without getting a warrant.)  Read more here.

UPDATE:  Slides from the talk are available here (pdf).

Welcome to Being On To Something

Welcome to Being On To Something.

I have created this site in order to share with you -- my family, friends, colleagues, and anyone else who is interested -- certain moments in my life, highlights on the journey that never ends.  For me the journey is about choosing to be happy, learning about the world, challenging myself to be a better person and to experience new things, and to leave the world in better shape than before I arrived.  A big part of the journey is the idea that I always want to be Being On To Something.  That is the name that my great friend Kevin Aaron gave for his ethos of discovery. This is what he said about it.

BEING ON TO SOMETHING:  A META-MODE FOR LIVING THE DREAM AND KEEPING IT REAL

by Kevin Aaron

I always hope everyone I haven't been in touch with for a while is on to something when I get to talk to them.

I'm currently on to being on to something.

Being on to something means that one is aware of and open to the creative possibilities engendered by one's experiences and emotions (good, bad, or ugly).

It's not about being on to something for the sake of being on to something, but instead is achieved when one has "been experienced" with regard to something they find interesting. As an example, I have been really into Jimi Hendrix at certain points over the years, letting myself become "experienced" and then sharing my excitement with others who may want to be on to Hendrix.

If I had the time I could go down the list of all of us and what we've been on to over the years, or I could break down the realm of thing that one can be on to.

I'm talking about being on to something in the literal, pop culture sense, like detectives looking for clues that could lead any number of interesting ways.

Even if you're down and out, you can be on to that situation in a number of ways: one could be on to How does the light play in your room from dawn to dark? You could also be on to your own mode of thinking, be on to picking weeds in the garden, be on to making candles, be on to guessing peoples heights and weights, be on to being nice to yourself, etc. . . .

It doesn't take much concentration to be on to something.

I feel that a good story of my life could be told through the things I've been on to.

Being on to something is not for everyone. Many people feel secure in living without being on to something, because being on to something requires an admission that you don't know and haven't experienced everything life offers.

Being on to something requires an inquisitive personality, with its underlying implication that there are always more questions than answers, but when answers are found, by way of an "ah-ha!" moment, the deep meaning of your journey is reaffirmed. Following an "ah-ha!" moment, you can settle back and revel in it, or you can set off toward the next "ah-ha!" moment feeling that now you are really on to something. Each way is fine, so long as each "ah-ha!" moment is duly noted. We possess these "ah-ha!" moments with pride and joy and hope to share with others who may be interested in what you are on to.

Another example of being on to something: Read a good novel, then find out the author and read another of their books, or a different book about the history within which the novel is set, or you could then be on to reading books that area entirely different from one to the next, like a zen self help book. See what I'm getting at? No matter what you are on to, you are living the dream.

don't be denied,

Kevin