Social Media

This is my situation: I have been off of instagram for a year, facebook a year and a half, and I only spent a few months trialing TikTok to understand what it is. My facebook journey lasted a dozen years, instagram about four.

I think the primary reason I took the steps was that I naturally, in accelerating into my 30s, began to take as broad a look on life as I could, in preparation for the future: family and kids. I felt that the accelerating discussion into social media and its effects drove me into my normal response of beginning to rationalise the argument (this joined to becoming exasperated with time-usage that I increasingly felt as “gamified”). After a broader time of consideration, I decided there could only be a plunge or no-plunge decision if I wanted first-hand knowledge, which I knew would have value going forward.

I’m happy with my journey. I think I have a fairer understanding of the social media -related debates and also a newly found appreciation for just simple life. I can’t question to any extent the power of focus and precision I have gained on many fronts: such is the impact of returned time.

Perhaps for me, having grown up with the computer since childhood, this was also an opportunity to really take a step back out of technology to understand life and find myself. I didn’t consider it at the time, but during and later. I literally have no regrets for the time spent doing so: time more with self than ever before, built based off of less time digitally than practically ever before.. I honestly recommend the full-off trip as a grounding experience, especially for those much younger than me who have only ever known a digital entirety around them. Just don’t go all-in and full-delete your account, like I did: I don’t recommend it.

I don’t think that the future will remain like this for me, even if the step off has definitely had benefits on several fronts during the time being. Family and kids, I am sure, will be the ultimate “digital story restarters”. I find the couple-account stories, such as this one in Wired, to be really interesting.

© 2019 Jens J. Sørensen


I truly believe that Michael Schumacher will be healed and can return to relative normalcy. The current advancement rate of technology is so significant that I simply would not question the ability of the doctors and scientists to figure out everything that needs to be figured out to get it done. Joining this to the obvious fact that Schumacher is not fiscally restrained: I’m not pessimistic, to say the least. Most importantly: I’m not negative. I also find it most warming to think that after the precedent gained by, for example, a successful-Schumacher health-return, the outward-rippling wave of further healing, I mean, just wholly expands the value created by an exponential amount, because of the confidences and learnings, gained from the initial success story/stories, carrying through to the future. Knowing how, across industries, that same primary & follow-on is just happening all the time out there across the economy (I know, for example by having watched this documentary on BBC Brit about a cancer treatment investment that saved a boy – there was slight crying, on both sides of the screen): that’s really amazing. I really love money for making it all possible to happen.

I’m not ashamed to talk about the fact that our generation (1980s-born) has gone through first into the wave of online porn, back in the day (and night). My take on the entire scape of politics on that front, now that I’m an adult, is to always pay for it.

© 2019 Jens J. Sørensen

Being well

I still do not understand why Facebook isn’t charging me for Whatsapp? I mean it’s practically a life-necessity: I’d be a much happier communications piping -Customer if I could rest long-term assured of Facebook’s and Whatsapp’s profitability, and I believe that me paying ten bucks a year (and a lot of other people doing so as well, because they’re already hooked) is the best way to do that. There would still be those who prefer ads, but I’d like to keep those completely out of my private life. So far I haven’t seen any on Whatsapp in Finland, but I’m sure they’re on their way: spending swarm that they are.

“It is really interesting to notice how people have changed across a halfish-generation, between those of us born in the late 1980s as compared to those a decade later and on this side of the millennium. Obviously the frequency gap goes perfectly in line with the technology inflation behind it: the difference in growing up between having computing power in a box at home (us) versus having computing power in a phone everywhere (them) is massive. Currently, I’d pinpoint the main differentiator across generations as people-perception capacity: though elder generations have had more time to see life, the younger ones have had more powerful tools, enabling the overtake.

But, come to think of it, the relative communication speed increases had by and between several generations before us, leading to the current state, have also been substantial. What makes this point we are in now even more interesting is that what has been experienced in a relatively short span of a few generations – increases in communication speed – will next be rolled over on to an off-Planet trajectory. It will probably take centuries, just as did the Americas to colonise, to live across the solar system, for all the technology needed to do so needs to be invented. The desire to get there is what sparks the passion to begin doing so: I wish them all the best who are already at work. Having read, in his book, of the late Dr. Aki Hintsa’s work with Formula 1 drivers, and knowing of similar work and study (for example at the renowned University of Jyväskylä), I’ve personally found it very interesting that the study of the furthest-end human capacity has developed to the state that it has today (only by study have I done so, but by no means through practice!). Those involved in the sciences and practices are sure to play a central part in enabling the aerospace industries further, where I imagine this type of knowledge plays a central role for training space candidates.”

I call the Nordic societal model the well-being state, not the welfare state. Welfare has connotations of handouts and passivity: well-being is an operative outcome. Seeing how democracy and clearly defined boundaries of sovereignty, across all manners and matters of dealings, are important, seeing how that creates the wealth had in trust, needed for the markets and governing society to work together peacefully, that is important to me. I really had to keep that in mind during recent dealings: the main gist of a long business story is that I had to really think about why I was allowed to act upon the potential massive-gain on already-owned property, by projecting a ridiculously huge but still completely logical business idea (thus balancing the allowances).

Anyway: what being well comes down to, really, is money. It is a pretty fundamental starting point. It is what funds life. Yes, work as an answer is like whacking with a blunt-object, but it is smart to say, since it reminds us that everything comes out as a result of it. From this perspective, the United States of Americans are our best friends: the promulgation of a culture of work and resultant money from their troubled yet magnificently accomplished history is literally the best thing to have happened to humankind ever, since they’ve set the example for individual initiative that cuts through to my deepest core.

Individual initiative is what leads to all progress. Because of the economy and its modern solutions, made possible by the knowledge- and motivation-transfer speed of money (as opposed to near-range barter, which would severely limit choices available in the market), I in Finland don’t have to live in or close to the cold forest: I can live in an upscale, downtown, and globally-connected penthouse.

With full respect for the nature around me that I love and the people that live closer to it or within it: my home is my home, and I choose to live how I choose to live. That is why I really love the market, for it builds those choices for me and makes them available to be had. It frees the imagination to gaze at a broader set of future possibilities, thanks to the capacity that people have had made available to them to think for themselves: because the market allows people to imagine solutions to noticed problems (given they know they are able to take initiative), they can react with relative immediacy, gaining power for themselves and empowering those around them with whatever is being sold and the example being set of making it happen.

The growth of the modern market system is what has led to the fullest speed pricing mechanism to have been unleashed to begin unifying the latest demand with the latest supply. It might be paradoxical that the system has created the problems that it will next begin to solve (I think of history as having squeezed a bunch of stuff out, from which pruning has begun), but such is the fact of fiscal and monetary logic, and basic everyday common sense, that the only way global problems will be solved is with a global system. There is philosophy, there is legislation, there is media: then there is the technology market and its financiers where the people work solving the issues everyone else is rightly worried about. Their capacity to deliver is not in an immediate-tune with those waiting for the delivery: that must be said for the creation of patience under pressure.

To be well there must be the starting point of feeling safe, and in today’s world that means there needs to be on-going talk about climate change being solved. For that talk to exist, there needs to be the market and the journalists covering it that understand what they’re doing. Finance is the solution: not the problem. Finance is the calculated deployment of capital, which allows solutions to happen in reality. I simply cannot tolerate anyone speaking out against the markets as a monster. It is blatant idiocy that works against being able to build peace in more than just words: money shifts the matter. The markets are and have been since the dawn of humankind the most natural part of how we live, as we exchange the supply of our raw materials, skills, and tools across the demand of our wants and needs, as connected with the community and communities around us.

Now it happens at a grander scale. What people who do not yet understand money (it is hard to understand something you don’t have, for example) fail to see is how gigantic and immensely fast the market system, which they have lived with since the villages and forests, has become. Think of an ever-continuing tornado of contracts flying around, defining the starting points of the market that build its outcomes (a tornado that started locally, connected globally, and will continue to expand into space as it has already done for decades).

If everyone is yelling at the people with the money, the thing that they’re not going to have as they do their best to focus is the required peace needed to be able to do so. So, as for being stressed listening to a teenage rebellion: press mute in your head, with full respect. Greta & Co. are kids who are burnt out at the maximal trough, which they shouldn’t have to be ever again. But, obviously: it takes time to react to an ultimate global matter. The deep-level technology upgrades required are planned for implementation at the regional and local levels, and the world doesn’t change all that quickly down on the ground at that level (educating local decision-makers instead of ranting nationally/globally: a smarter strategy for the kids?).

I think climate change combative products and mass-technology will develop at enough of a substantial rate that we’ll start to see significant progress in a decade: what I mean is actual results of changes in nature towards a positive direction. I wish for nothing more in my lifetime than for climate change activists to quiet down. That would mean that their demands for objective progress are being met.

Past this, I’m a shut up and get to work kind of dude. In my privacy, I do continue to understand that, to get started towards the decades-ahead results, the present environmental discourse must be able to sustain itself. To that end, I wish other long-term thinking climate activists the best: at the end of the day, we know it comes down to changes in purchasing behaviour.

© 2019 Jens J. Sørensen


“Ydinstadi jakautuu luotettavasti kolmeen: Töölöt, Etelät, Kalliot. Alueet ovat monikossa, sillä Töölöjä on Etu- ja Taka-versiot, Eteliä on Jätkäsaaresta Eiraan, ja Kallioita on kukkuloilla ja kupittelurannoilla. Pasila on kuin uusi helmi joka lepää Vanhan Kolmikon päällä.”

As I have written about cars (Oh, CARS) then I must lay down a few lines on cities. En masse we have forgotten that but a few decades ago we were not moving around in cars, travelling great distances during a day getting a million and one things done, all of which contribute to the economy. People were quite stationary: to say the least.

Now that we then have a societal infrastructure and living rhythms built around cars, we of course have the immense problems that come with it, ranging from environmental hazard to social troubles resultant from time spent in traffic, away from Family. So whilst the loving of cars shall most definitely continue then clearly we have to look beyond, as well.

Cities are the answer. Build modernity into a tightly packed, well-designed area and you not only have the capacity to drop the reliance on cars from your masterplan but you also save plenty of nature by not spreading a suburb out into it. Cities are the most objective and correct answer to move us forward.

Cities are immense. How many people live in cities? The answer, spoken modernly, is shit-tons. There are shit-tons of people living in cities and plenty more continuing to move in around the world. That’s damned good news for the environment, as long as the cities are built properly.

Cities are human-built forests and jungles, radiating wealth into the surrounding lands. Cities are oases of growth: the megaseeds of the future where interaction between people creating action works much like the core of a nuclear reactor. A bunch of economic agents, ”human particles”, bouncing around from tower to tower, café to cocktail bar meeting others until matches strike across business lives, love lives, and so forth.

Cities are pop. They are so awesome that they require their own lexicon of amazespeak. Spectamungular could be a good first word, for all I care: cities deserve all the love on the Planet right now, for cities will save it.

I live in a city. It is fair enough to say that Helsinki, Finland has been passing through the infinite cusp between large town and city for the past decade or two. But it is now most definitely a global-level city.

Cities are not for everyone. In their condensed form, luckily this means that naturally cities leave space for all the other forms of land usage around them. If you do not like cities, I suggest you do not live in them.

Cities. I mean God: CITIES. Is there anything more spectacular than CITIES?

© 2019 Jens J. Sørensen


Update September 1st: as a lifelong F1 fan, I felt very saddened by the passing of F2 Racer Anthoine Hubert. I also feel very strongly for France, whom lost another rising star and has been through so very much in the past few years. Let’s use this moment to remember that Jules Bianchi, who perished from his wounds suffered at the Japanese Grand Prix in 2014 in the summer of 2015, was also French: I send all of my best to the French motorsport community.

When it comes to life-saving work then the contribution to every life saved comes obviously from a broad range of industries. I’d like to focus our interest on cars.

Cars: they come in many shapes and sizes. They’ve grown and shrunk and transformed into lorries and ambulances. I sometimes like to capitalise (and capitalise upon) Cars, as it just is not so that I do not have an emotional connection with them. My 2001 Opel Astra coupé, my most prized possession (also known as the Batmobile), is an object that I have literal emotions for. I’m looking forward to continuing to pimp it out once the excess cash allows for it. The thing about the 2001 Astra is that it has a very sturdy chassis, making it a tight drive, and a very recognisable, mildly boxy (but alas, spacious) body shape that, for me at least, sets it apart from other choices in the age- and price-range (hence I own it): this makes it a challenge to modify, since I don’t want to go too far into breaking the mold of the original.

Cars save lives. Literally. Every day, cars literally allow people to live modern lives: modern lives are built on cars. How do you transport a family across schools, hobbies, commerces, friends & relatives without a car?

You simply don’t. Without the car, the potential for that will be lost, at least until we all live in pristine ultra-high quality Cities (mm mega-emotion) where cars are sidelined.

But we don’t have that today, do we?

Building cities takes quite a while, doesn’t it?

So cars are. They simply must be, as we have built our entire societal structure around their being. Thankfully so, for I believe in mobility (mass and singular). Unilocality is simply not an option. Thank God for cars.

Having a car quite objectively shows how having the money to have one in the first place is what allows you to accelerate: if you can drive through your days, especially as a parent, you’ll be getting more done, since you’ll be moving faster. Nothing shows social inequality better than cars. How price elastic is your behaviour at the pump? The price of oil doesn’t matter if you’re loaded: the market isn’t slowing you down, whilst it is doing so to others. Then again, if you’re loaded, you’re probably in a position of power so as to be able to help the others, so you’d want to be able to keep going, and everyone else should want that too, as long as you’re doing the helping.



I so lovingly look at this moment and forward to the future ones where we continue to have each other. In beauty and in stench, allow us to be. Of course, it is important to have the right, sustainable energy mix to keep us going: a mixture of renewable-combustible fuels and nuclear et al-powered electricity shall most definitely do the trick.

© 2019 Jens J. Sørensen

Supremacy Over the Tool

Ultimately, supremacy over the tool comes down to whether or not you have notifications turned on.

I’d say it is smart to consider what notifications make sense, like a spring cleaning (perhaps the digital space naturally gets the autumn cleaning, then?): the primary value of automated notification is speed-to-outcome regarding the information.

That in turn forces the consideration of the desire to obtain the outcome. Must everything be carried? That is to say: notifications have time-cost weight, and not all information is worth the carried effort. I’ve found that many things previously notified-in-automation, and subsequently turned off, but still wished to be returned to, come back with a natural rate of just falling into it: whatever it was that was, in the past, notified about. Clearing out also makes space for the bringing-in of the new, and helps keep the economy in motion, so you know: extra-added value.

So it’s like: “Babe, what’s your Notifications-policy? I’m all outta digital whack and gotta clean up this screenplace.”

The proper way to ask the question is “Witch came first: Chicken or the Egg?” then she decides what she’ll have haha

© 2019 Jens J. Sørensen


“Kannattaa aina tiedostaa sekä henkinen että fyysinen matka Helsingistä Utsjoelle. Siinä on välissä aika monta kehää pohdittavaa: ainakin enemmän kuin kolme.”

At the base of all the considerations of economics are zoning rights to land. This is where the mathematical-logic of economics meets the cultures and law of the people: where objectivity fuses into subjective emotion at scale, and where the main bases for the arguments on behalf of democracy rest.

Zoning decisions guide the entire process of economic and societal growth had thereafter upon any said land in question. Here, the matching of demand to supply should be as optimized through democracy as possible: the effects on society are longest-term. In Finland, for example, we have two large Everyday Merchant -chains (Kesko and the S-Group) who have, on this side of the millennium, begun to have become challenged by the Germany-based Lidl. Their relative political power, as measured by zoning rights and those to project their formation, determines who has how much market share in whichever planned locations of commerce.

As the transparency of government and its operation has improved in Finland, distancing previous strangleholds on local market areas to make space for new competitors, so has Lidl’s position: this is a positive development, since the citizens acting as customers have been happy, since they’ve had more choice. The market for products has broadened: everyday life now contains more possibilities.

Here we can observe that what matters next, after zoning rights, is market share distribution amongst the created real estate: which type of market participants own (either directly or through lease-&-use) how much of what type of usable area, and how well are they doing overall, fiscally and otherwise? I believe that local economies are the most important place to start when considering the state of a nation objectively: what Economics is supposed to continue focusing upon. The sum of the parts builds the whole.

None of what I’m saying is, of course, at any level, new in any way: I’m just compressing it into as-fast-as-possible a reset-button by coupling the logic of the science with a practical market example. The calling of the remembrance of the obvious, so to say, in the steering of the global economy across future times, towards better directions. I truly think that, to get themselves back on their feet after the last decade of taking the heat, macroeconomists just need to start at the basics and keep doing so: “societal consultants” as they are.

Area studies, economic geography, is the beginning of the whole field: it should be compulsory 101. Understanding the land and what it is doing and why should be at the base of every student’s mind: it is what we live on and, given that economics has a huge impact on how we’re living, the study has to be a central part of the entirety. It just sort of ignites the process of figuring it out as inducing from primary principles.

Suomen kuluttajatalouden isoin haaste on S-ryhmän ylisuuri presenssi asiakasrajapinnassa. Haluan korostaa sitä, kuinka uskomattoman hyvin toimivat koneistot Keskolla ja S-ryhmällä ovat nostaneet Suomen elintasoa läpi viime vuosikymmenten, parantaen saatavilla olevaa valikoimaa etenkin tämän vuosituhannen puolella. Ongelmana on kuitenkin se, että paikallistalouksien mahdollisuudet yrittäjyyteen ovat liian kapeat sen myötä, että S-ryhmä on vallannut liian suuren osan asiakasrajapinnasta: Suomen pienkaupunkien pääkadut ovat usein miltei täysin S-ryhmän hallinnassa eivätkä yksityisyrittäjät kykene kilpailemaan tasavertaisista lähtökohdista. S-ryhmän pilkkominen siten, että sen tehokas logistinen koneisto ei vaarannu, on tärkeätä: yrittäjien mahdollisuuksia yrittää pitää parantaa merkittävästi tekemällä markkinoille tilaa.

© 2019 Jens J. Sørensen

Value Creation

“Effort creates value, value gives emotion, emotion is power.”

Let’s begin by stating the obvious that, every now and then, the obvious needs to be stated. There are many reasons for the necessity of the statement of the obvious, primarily the refreshment that is wrought from feeling oneself to be of intelligence, with minimal effort.

The below statements of an obvious nature, apart from showing how time can be slowed down by delving into the details of a transactional moment, truly show how an artistic presentation can really churn out a point.

Narrow value

Objective receipt.
A certainly objective receipt.

A Customer has actual cash, potential chocolate. A Purveyor has actual chocolate, potential cash. The Customer is in the market for chocolate. The Purveyor is in the market for cash. A shared flash of light. The Customer and the Purveyor conduct an exchange of ownership: cash for chocolate, chocolate for cash. The transfer instant creates its own proof in the form of a receipt, a contract proving the past – if it is trusted to have been had as documented. The Purveyor now has money. The Customer now has chocolate. Value is had in its most narrow of forms: ownership has been transferred. Primary market goals have been fulfilled.

Value expansion

An uncertain situation.
An uncertain situation.

The mouth expands. The Customer eats the chocolate. The Purveyor draws a breath of hope. Time moves on, as it does, as such is its way.

Broad value

A pleasant clearing.
A pleasant clearing.

A Customer’s smile. A Purveyor’s relief. Broadened may value be, thanks to the power of feedback, you see. Objectivity keeps the definition of value on the nigh, subjectivity brings the emotion: see it multiply. Ne’er forget that an instant is but one, but a smile is a sign, that more of them can be won. So be sure to ask for feedback – never fear to hear – for with the knowledge of the truth, you’ll be hittin’ more home runs, just like good ol’ Babe Ruth.

Lame to the point, but it has been made.

© 2018 Jens J. Sørensen