Friday, March 27, 2009
You can run but you can't hide
WSJ Article: To Sketch a Thief: Genes Draw Likeness of Suspects
The article above describes how scientists are discovering genes that help them determine what you look like from a sample of your DNA. They are identifying genes that indicate your race, skin color, eye color, hair color, face length, face width, nose width, shape of the lips etc. all from just your DNA, basically building a police sketch from your DNA. They hope to use the technology in criminal investigations.
The article above describes how scientists are discovering genes that help them determine what you look like from a sample of your DNA. They are identifying genes that indicate your race, skin color, eye color, hair color, face length, face width, nose width, shape of the lips etc. all from just your DNA, basically building a police sketch from your DNA. They hope to use the technology in criminal investigations.
Well I did it.
I've always loved science. From third grade on I always wanted to be a scientist.
I was actually a physics student in college until I found computer science more alluring. That's way back when computers were the giant electronic brains that only the priesthood (computer programmers) knew how to communicate with. I loved that experience.
But ever since I've wanted to get back to science and specifically physics. Being a busy father and husband doesn't quite permit that luxury yet, but at least I can participate in a small way.
I recently bought a computer, nothing powerful or expensive but a good average computer. Last night I downloaded software to my computer that allows it to participate in a grid of computers doing analysis for scientific research, specifically protein folding.
What the software does is use your PC's idle computer time to do calculations for modeling how proteins in your human cells fold up in their final shape for use. Proteins are the chemical machines that do the work in living cells. The proteins are assembled by stitching amino acids together. Once a protein is completed, it is released into the cell where it folds up in a specific shape. Its shape allows it do its chemical work. Its shape results from the final outcome of the electric forces of each of its atoms pushing on each other until a balance is found resulting in the final shape. What the software does is simulate the physics of each nanosecond how the atoms are pushing on each other to get to the balanced shape.
There are so many calculations that there isn't a super computer on the entire planet that could do the calculations in a reasonable amount of time for even one protein. Therefore, the researchers decided to use grid computing to parse the work out to anyone's computer who wants to participate. There are approximately 400,000 people participating and they now have more computing power than all the supercomputers on the planet put together. Even Sony Playstations can download the software and participate and many people are doing just that. In fact the Playstations have great computing power. For the newer PC's the sofware is using all the CPU cores and even the graphics processors to do the work.
I downloaded the software to my PC last night and it completed its first calculation assignment in about three hours. The software runs in the background. It didn't interfere or slow my use in any way. In fact I had to keep checking on it to see if it was still running. It makes me happy. Sometimes its the small things.
The researchers are now focusing more on misshapen proteins. Many diseases are caused by misshapened proteins.
The research and computing program are run from Stanford University. Below is their web site.
http://folding.stanford.edu/
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Honda's Hydrogen Car customers
Here's a link to see the people currently leasing the Honda Hydrogen car in southern California.
Honda FCX Customers
Honda FCX Customers
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Hey Mikey, he gets it!
President Obama finally gets it. He finally understands that beating the goose that lays the golden egg is not the way to fix the economy.
President Obama's long anti business rants are finally coming to an end as he realizes that without business he has nothing to work with. He finally understands that he must be leading and doing the right thing to solve problems.
Acting as if all business people are greedy good for nothings is both untrue and unhelpful, not to mention his attacks recently damaged his own administration as blame fell on his own chosen Treasury Secretary.
Now, maybe President Obama can get to work on fixing these problems.
And I don't want to hear any more about how the Republicans got us in this mess when President Obama himself voted as senator two years ago against stricter regulations on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as proposed by John McCain. The democrat congress of the last two years is just as guily at looking the other way as any other.
So lets get down to business and fix this mess.
President Obama's long anti business rants are finally coming to an end as he realizes that without business he has nothing to work with. He finally understands that he must be leading and doing the right thing to solve problems.
Acting as if all business people are greedy good for nothings is both untrue and unhelpful, not to mention his attacks recently damaged his own administration as blame fell on his own chosen Treasury Secretary.
Now, maybe President Obama can get to work on fixing these problems.
And I don't want to hear any more about how the Republicans got us in this mess when President Obama himself voted as senator two years ago against stricter regulations on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as proposed by John McCain. The democrat congress of the last two years is just as guily at looking the other way as any other.
So lets get down to business and fix this mess.
Given the recent March Madness
Given the recent March Madness, and no I don't mean President Obama's continuing attacks on the business world, wouldn't it be cool to be able to watch the NCAA basketball games on your big screen TV and share the games with your friends.
What do I mean? What if you could watch a game on TV and be connected to your friends wherever they might be. Your big screen TV would show the game in one "window" while you would see your friends in other windows on the screen like a video conference. You could see each other, share comments, yell, jump up and down. You could share the experience. This could also apply to movies or other television shows on TV. You could watch these together. Also, with recent annoucements that any video game will be playable across the net without a need for an Xbox or Playstation with new gaming technology then this experience could be shared as well.
Its coming. How fast is difficult to discern. These days its not the technology holding these ideas up, its the fear of losing control by the providers of media content. Its funny, their fear often makes their loss of control more complete. Those that adapt early actually maintain more control of their content in the long run.
What do I mean? What if you could watch a game on TV and be connected to your friends wherever they might be. Your big screen TV would show the game in one "window" while you would see your friends in other windows on the screen like a video conference. You could see each other, share comments, yell, jump up and down. You could share the experience. This could also apply to movies or other television shows on TV. You could watch these together. Also, with recent annoucements that any video game will be playable across the net without a need for an Xbox or Playstation with new gaming technology then this experience could be shared as well.
Its coming. How fast is difficult to discern. These days its not the technology holding these ideas up, its the fear of losing control by the providers of media content. Its funny, their fear often makes their loss of control more complete. Those that adapt early actually maintain more control of their content in the long run.
Friday, March 20, 2009
Americans Learn from Russia
Well its nice to see that the Russians have taught Americans something, writing tax policy to target specific individuals.
As much as I'm not happy about the bonuses at AIG, writing tax policy to target those specific bonuses is nutty and seems dangerous to me as a new government policy. I don't think the congress will succeed, but should they pass it we will be in for a long haul of a legal fight and I almost wonder if its constitutional writing law that is specific for certain individuals. Of course the tax code already does that to some extent targeting the wealthy.
For a while there was talk about nullifying the contracts which violating contract law would not be in the best of interest of the United States. Thankfully, the government officials finally got some sense in them about that and dropped that idea.
A lot of people said that the AIG contracts should be renegotiated to remove the bonuses just like the UAW is having to renegotiate its contracts with GM, Ford, and Chrysler. The UAW contracts are being changed for now and the future. The AIG contracts are for last year. I don't think the UAW is being asked to renegotiate the money the workers earned making the cars last year that nobody wanted. The UAW contracts are being renegotiated for the coming years and I'm sure the new AIG contracts will be renegotiated as well.
Is the congress trustworthy. After the big blowup about the bonuses the congress and Timothy Geithner finally admitted they knew about the bonuses all along. I guess that means the congress was actually lying to us for several days before they finally came clean.
But the whole things seems absurd to me. Congress has blown enough money on bridges to nowhere to equate to at least 1000 million dollars per congressman. The congress should not be wasting time on AIG bonuses of 167 million while the economy burns down. Fine get indignant about the bonuses, say you don't like it, but its a contract, can't change it, and then move on to the nation's business.
The contracts were written more than a year ago, so I don't see there is much to be done. Of course its not clear to me how you can have a bonus. I thought bonuses were divided out of profit. If there's no profit how can there be a bonus. I did hear one short analysis that said what they call bonuses on Wall Street are really more like sales commissions. You earn a sales commission on what you sell not on the profit the company makes. But I can't verify this.
I'll end with a statement made by Jay Leno to President Obama.
"If the government decides they don't like a guy, all of the sudden hey we're going to tax you, and, boom, and it passes, that's seems a little scary," he said. "It was frightening to me as an American that Congress or whoever could decide I don't like that group, let's pass a law and tax them 90 percent." - Jay Leno
As much as I'm not happy about the bonuses at AIG, writing tax policy to target those specific bonuses is nutty and seems dangerous to me as a new government policy. I don't think the congress will succeed, but should they pass it we will be in for a long haul of a legal fight and I almost wonder if its constitutional writing law that is specific for certain individuals. Of course the tax code already does that to some extent targeting the wealthy.
For a while there was talk about nullifying the contracts which violating contract law would not be in the best of interest of the United States. Thankfully, the government officials finally got some sense in them about that and dropped that idea.
A lot of people said that the AIG contracts should be renegotiated to remove the bonuses just like the UAW is having to renegotiate its contracts with GM, Ford, and Chrysler. The UAW contracts are being changed for now and the future. The AIG contracts are for last year. I don't think the UAW is being asked to renegotiate the money the workers earned making the cars last year that nobody wanted. The UAW contracts are being renegotiated for the coming years and I'm sure the new AIG contracts will be renegotiated as well.
Is the congress trustworthy. After the big blowup about the bonuses the congress and Timothy Geithner finally admitted they knew about the bonuses all along. I guess that means the congress was actually lying to us for several days before they finally came clean.
But the whole things seems absurd to me. Congress has blown enough money on bridges to nowhere to equate to at least 1000 million dollars per congressman. The congress should not be wasting time on AIG bonuses of 167 million while the economy burns down. Fine get indignant about the bonuses, say you don't like it, but its a contract, can't change it, and then move on to the nation's business.
The contracts were written more than a year ago, so I don't see there is much to be done. Of course its not clear to me how you can have a bonus. I thought bonuses were divided out of profit. If there's no profit how can there be a bonus. I did hear one short analysis that said what they call bonuses on Wall Street are really more like sales commissions. You earn a sales commission on what you sell not on the profit the company makes. But I can't verify this.
I'll end with a statement made by Jay Leno to President Obama.
"If the government decides they don't like a guy, all of the sudden hey we're going to tax you, and, boom, and it passes, that's seems a little scary," he said. "It was frightening to me as an American that Congress or whoever could decide I don't like that group, let's pass a law and tax them 90 percent." - Jay Leno
American Chavistas at work...
Well the American Chavistas are at it again.
The unions recently sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner asking him to silence any company receiving bailout money from campaigning against the Employee Free Choice Act. This act eliminates the secret ballot form of voting for employees voting whether or not to unionize. Without a secret ballot, the union people can intimidate others into signing union cards.
The very act of an outside organization asking a government official to use his power to silence its opposition is a very frightening precedent. As far as I know the Treasury Secretary has ignored the request, but the potential is not good.
The unions also are responsible for the language put in the stimulus bill to stop the policy to allow Mexican trucks to deliver goods into the U.S. which Mexico said is a violation of the NAFTA trade agreement. Mexico has retaliated. Thanks to the unions the word of the American government is no longer trustworthy and now we have a trade war. Just what we need in the middle of a depression.
I guess the unions are going to do for the U.S. what they have done for education and the car manufacturers.
The unions recently sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner asking him to silence any company receiving bailout money from campaigning against the Employee Free Choice Act. This act eliminates the secret ballot form of voting for employees voting whether or not to unionize. Without a secret ballot, the union people can intimidate others into signing union cards.
The very act of an outside organization asking a government official to use his power to silence its opposition is a very frightening precedent. As far as I know the Treasury Secretary has ignored the request, but the potential is not good.
The unions also are responsible for the language put in the stimulus bill to stop the policy to allow Mexican trucks to deliver goods into the U.S. which Mexico said is a violation of the NAFTA trade agreement. Mexico has retaliated. Thanks to the unions the word of the American government is no longer trustworthy and now we have a trade war. Just what we need in the middle of a depression.
I guess the unions are going to do for the U.S. what they have done for education and the car manufacturers.
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Stock Market Cartoon
I had to share this funny cartoon about the bear stock market and the government attempts to fix things. The people are Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, President Obama, and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
FINALLY!!!
For years, I've been wanting a simple light tablet that I could comfortably sit down with on the couch and surf the web or jot down notes, just a simple tablet screen without a keyboard. I would like to take it to meetings to hand write notes like a notepad. Just something simple. Have I said that enough.
Whenever I've mentioned this to other people, they look at you funny. No keyboard, what good is that. They don't seem to understand that the handwritten notes can be converted to typed text later or maybe the notes don't even need to be converted. As long as I can look up my notes who cares. Also, I would like the device to have a camera for scanning any documents passed out at a meeting or to take a picture of poster notes created during the meeting. Then I would quickly have that information available to me all the time on my tablet. Note I have used a digital camera before to get a record of poster notes and passed out documents and its worked well, but you get even more stupid looks when you do that. And of course there is the hassle of moving the pictures from your camera to your computer.
FINALLY, Apple is rumored to be building such a device (article: It's Time For An Apple Tablet). I'm sure they're mainly developing it for web surfing, music, videos, etc. So I may not get the note taking abilities but at least it will be a start. My hopes are high.
Why do the simplest things I want seem to be the most difficult for people to understand.
p.s. Note that I'm not saying I will buy an Apple tablet, but maybe it will encourage the rest of the market to move in the right direction.
Whenever I've mentioned this to other people, they look at you funny. No keyboard, what good is that. They don't seem to understand that the handwritten notes can be converted to typed text later or maybe the notes don't even need to be converted. As long as I can look up my notes who cares. Also, I would like the device to have a camera for scanning any documents passed out at a meeting or to take a picture of poster notes created during the meeting. Then I would quickly have that information available to me all the time on my tablet. Note I have used a digital camera before to get a record of poster notes and passed out documents and its worked well, but you get even more stupid looks when you do that. And of course there is the hassle of moving the pictures from your camera to your computer.
FINALLY, Apple is rumored to be building such a device (article: It's Time For An Apple Tablet). I'm sure they're mainly developing it for web surfing, music, videos, etc. So I may not get the note taking abilities but at least it will be a start. My hopes are high.
Why do the simplest things I want seem to be the most difficult for people to understand.
p.s. Note that I'm not saying I will buy an Apple tablet, but maybe it will encourage the rest of the market to move in the right direction.
Friday, March 6, 2009
Big Government is On Its Way
Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act
I guess President Obama is accomplishing his goal of reversing President Reagan's achievements that gave us 28 years of growth.
Big Government is on its way back. The recent bill regarding lead and phthalates that went into effect on February 10 as I understand it requires any items sold for children's use to be tested and certified that it is lead and phthalates free. Sounds harmless and reasonable but its not. The law requires every batch of items to be certified.
Before there were existing laws against lead, now the new law says everything is guilty until proven innocent.
Small businesses are saying they will go out of business. One business owner said that if he produces a batch of 20 coloring books he must have them tested to certify they are lead free. The certification test cost nearly $2000 dollars. Even buttons on children's clothing must be certified. Bicycle vendors are having to take bicycles back because there is lead in some parts that is normally allowed but not under this law. Goodwill says they have $175 million worth of items that they can't sale now. Walmart is making many vendors take their products back because they're not "certified".
This all reminds me of the 1970's before Reagan got rid of this mess. I remember the government agency OSHA came out with a ruling that businesses must convert all toilet seats in their companies to oval shaped toilet seats. Then a few years later, OSHA changed its ruling and said all toilet seats must be horse shoe shaped costing business a lot of money. The government was involved in everybody's business to the minutest detail.
President Reagan freed us from a lot of this nonsense and the economy took off. The environment afterwards was quite different from the sickness and stagflation of the 1970's. Now when we are in our worst economic decline, the democrats want to heap this mess and costs on us again.
Here's a quote of who is affected by this law from the government office empowered by this act.
"Anyone who makes, produces or assembles a product is considered to be a manufacturer. If what you make is sold or donated, something as simple as adding ribbons to hair clips, knitting hats, or stringing beads into necklaces make you a manufacturer. " Quite broad, I would say.
Oh by the way the same office says there is really no way to test and certify there are no phthalates in an item but do you best to make sure.
I guess President Obama is accomplishing his goal of reversing President Reagan's achievements that gave us 28 years of growth.
Big Government is on its way back. The recent bill regarding lead and phthalates that went into effect on February 10 as I understand it requires any items sold for children's use to be tested and certified that it is lead and phthalates free. Sounds harmless and reasonable but its not. The law requires every batch of items to be certified.
Before there were existing laws against lead, now the new law says everything is guilty until proven innocent.
Small businesses are saying they will go out of business. One business owner said that if he produces a batch of 20 coloring books he must have them tested to certify they are lead free. The certification test cost nearly $2000 dollars. Even buttons on children's clothing must be certified. Bicycle vendors are having to take bicycles back because there is lead in some parts that is normally allowed but not under this law. Goodwill says they have $175 million worth of items that they can't sale now. Walmart is making many vendors take their products back because they're not "certified".
This all reminds me of the 1970's before Reagan got rid of this mess. I remember the government agency OSHA came out with a ruling that businesses must convert all toilet seats in their companies to oval shaped toilet seats. Then a few years later, OSHA changed its ruling and said all toilet seats must be horse shoe shaped costing business a lot of money. The government was involved in everybody's business to the minutest detail.
President Reagan freed us from a lot of this nonsense and the economy took off. The environment afterwards was quite different from the sickness and stagflation of the 1970's. Now when we are in our worst economic decline, the democrats want to heap this mess and costs on us again.
Here's a quote of who is affected by this law from the government office empowered by this act.
"Anyone who makes, produces or assembles a product is considered to be a manufacturer. If what you make is sold or donated, something as simple as adding ribbons to hair clips, knitting hats, or stringing beads into necklaces make you a manufacturer. " Quite broad, I would say.
Oh by the way the same office says there is really no way to test and certify there are no phthalates in an item but do you best to make sure.
Should have been in the stimulus
President Obama could have had a quick easy stimulus if he had eliminated corporate taxes for one year. This would have strengthened businesses and encouraged them to hold on to employees for a while longer. It would only have cost $325 billion and been immediate with no losses from government handling of money.
An even better option would have been to allow corporations with profits offshore to bring that money home with no taxes for one year. Generally, that money is not taxed if left in the foreign countries. The money is only taxed in the local country and not taxed again by the U.S. I bet a lot of that money would have flowed back to the United States stimulating the economy.
Instead President Obama is suggesting the opposite. He wants to tax the money that companies have in foreign countries, so companies will have to pay tax twice once to the foreign country and then again to the U.S.
I wonder if this will drain money from the U.S. If companies have to pay U.S. taxes on the money they use in their foreign operations, then they will have to replace it from somewhere to keep their foreign operations growing. That may mean they have to send money from the U.S. to their foreign operations.
President Obama and the Democratic party seem to be following their anti-capitalist philosophies.
As one business broadcaster recently asked, "is communist China the last great capitalist free-market country on the planet".
An even better option would have been to allow corporations with profits offshore to bring that money home with no taxes for one year. Generally, that money is not taxed if left in the foreign countries. The money is only taxed in the local country and not taxed again by the U.S. I bet a lot of that money would have flowed back to the United States stimulating the economy.
Instead President Obama is suggesting the opposite. He wants to tax the money that companies have in foreign countries, so companies will have to pay tax twice once to the foreign country and then again to the U.S.
I wonder if this will drain money from the U.S. If companies have to pay U.S. taxes on the money they use in their foreign operations, then they will have to replace it from somewhere to keep their foreign operations growing. That may mean they have to send money from the U.S. to their foreign operations.
President Obama and the Democratic party seem to be following their anti-capitalist philosophies.
As one business broadcaster recently asked, "is communist China the last great capitalist free-market country on the planet".
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Job hunting for introverts
Fortune Article: Job hunting for introverts
I thought this was a helpful article but funny to me since I are one, an introvert that is. Hopefully, I won't be job hunting again any time soon.
I thought this was a helpful article but funny to me since I are one, an introvert that is. Hopefully, I won't be job hunting again any time soon.
The Digital Generation
Click on the picture for a larger image.
I actually saw some teenagers doing this on the ski trip my son and I took in February. The teenagers were in the lodge where my son and I had lunch. I was quite amazed. The teenagers were listening to their ipods with earphones, playing cards, talking to each other, and were on their phones. I couldn't figure out how they could listen to their music and hear each other. WOW! No wonder kids are bored with schools that are still using tools from 100 years ago (ie: chalk board, books, paper).
Online Healthcare
WSJ Article: Cough, Cough. Is There a Doctor in the Mouse? (may require a subscription)
Microsoft Health Vault
This article describes online medical care offered through the internet. I was surprised to see that so much development was already in the works for online health care.
Watch the video on the Microsoft site and check out the web applications link on the lower right of the Microsoft web page.
From the article:
"In January, American Well Inc. went live with a Web service that allows patients to communicate with doctors via online video, text chat or phone. The doctors can view patient personal health records through Microsoft Corp.'s HealthVault and even prescribe medication over the Web. The service is currently available only in Hawaii through the Hawaii Medical Service Association, the Blue Cross Blue Shield affiliate in Hawaii. HMSA-insured patients pay $10 for a 10-minute visit; uninsured or non-member patients pay $45 for a 10-minute consultation."
Microsoft Health Vault
This article describes online medical care offered through the internet. I was surprised to see that so much development was already in the works for online health care.
Watch the video on the Microsoft site and check out the web applications link on the lower right of the Microsoft web page.
From the article:
"In January, American Well Inc. went live with a Web service that allows patients to communicate with doctors via online video, text chat or phone. The doctors can view patient personal health records through Microsoft Corp.'s HealthVault and even prescribe medication over the Web. The service is currently available only in Hawaii through the Hawaii Medical Service Association, the Blue Cross Blue Shield affiliate in Hawaii. HMSA-insured patients pay $10 for a 10-minute visit; uninsured or non-member patients pay $45 for a 10-minute consultation."
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Ben Bernanke
If the economy starts to recover in the next 12 months it will be due to the efforts of Ben Bernanke at the Federal Reserve not President Obama. Obama's stimulus plan won't really fully start kicking in until 15 months from now.
Ben Bernanke is working to repair the country's economy now. Bernanke's lastest effort is the Term Asset-Backed Loan Facility. This is an attempt to restart the debt securitzation market for credit cards, auto loans, student loans, etc. The chart above shows that this market has fallen from a $1 trillion market to a very small few billion. That's part of the reason there is not a lot of credit available.
A similar technique was used to restart the commercial paper market last fall. The technique worked very well. The commercial paper market was dead in the water threatening to shut down businesses because they couldn't get simple short term loans for daily operations. Bernanke got the Fed in the market and initiated the loans. The market rebooted and has been working smoothly since last fall. Now he is doing the same thing for the consumer market.
Way to go, Ben.
Ben Bernanke is working to repair the country's economy now. Bernanke's lastest effort is the Term Asset-Backed Loan Facility. This is an attempt to restart the debt securitzation market for credit cards, auto loans, student loans, etc. The chart above shows that this market has fallen from a $1 trillion market to a very small few billion. That's part of the reason there is not a lot of credit available.
A similar technique was used to restart the commercial paper market last fall. The technique worked very well. The commercial paper market was dead in the water threatening to shut down businesses because they couldn't get simple short term loans for daily operations. Bernanke got the Fed in the market and initiated the loans. The market rebooted and has been working smoothly since last fall. Now he is doing the same thing for the consumer market.
Way to go, Ben.
Update on the Employee Free Choice Act
Wall Street Journal Article: President Tells Unions Organizing Act Will Pass (may require subscription)
President Obama told the AFL-CIO union that the Employee Free Choice Act will pass. I guess its clear now where the President stands.
Other interesting items from the article:
"Separately, on Wednesday, the AFL-CIO is expected to ask the administration to take a controlling stake in banks that receive government funding and a more active role in restructuring their balance sheets."
"Organized labor plans to mobilize workers in states where support is weakest among Democratic lawmakers, lobby lawmakers directly and get companies that support the bill to endorse it publicly. Labor leaders didn't name companies targeted in this effort."
Maybe my nutty conspiracy theory isn't so nutty.
President Obama told the AFL-CIO union that the Employee Free Choice Act will pass. I guess its clear now where the President stands.
Other interesting items from the article:
"Separately, on Wednesday, the AFL-CIO is expected to ask the administration to take a controlling stake in banks that receive government funding and a more active role in restructuring their balance sheets."
"Organized labor plans to mobilize workers in states where support is weakest among Democratic lawmakers, lobby lawmakers directly and get companies that support the bill to endorse it publicly. Labor leaders didn't name companies targeted in this effort."
Maybe my nutty conspiracy theory isn't so nutty.
Netflix of Books
Just as Netflix offers all the movies you can watch and Rhapsody offers all the music you want to listen to or download to your mp3 player for a flat monthly fee, I wished Amazon would let me read as many books as I want online for a flat fee per month. I would gladly pay it.
Amazon has already loaded the entire contents of books for its search inside service, why can't they just take the next step and give me total access for a flat monthly fee. This is a case of the technology exists but fear stops it.
I'm sure the publishers are afraid the books will be copied and distributed accross the internet for free, but there's nothing to stop this now. One could quickly type or scan any book into an electronic file now and put it on the internet. Why doesn't this happen? It doesn't happen because people don't want to be arrested or sued.
Subscription based services are where the music, video, and books industries are going eventually anyway, especially once we have fast wireless internet access everywhere. Why do they waste time dragging their feet and actually encourage piracy by their resistance.
AMAZON, PLEASE PUT BOOKS ONLINE AND ON YOUR KINDLE FOR A FLAT FEE.
p.s. I would buy an iPod for music but Steve Jobs doesn't think subscription makes sense. Well, I don't think buying music makes sense.
With Rhapsody I can listen to anything, anything at all and it cost a lot less money. Poor iPod users can only listen to what they've purchased and they spend a lot of money getting a very small fraction of what I can listen to. The Netflix model ROCKS.
Amazon has already loaded the entire contents of books for its search inside service, why can't they just take the next step and give me total access for a flat monthly fee. This is a case of the technology exists but fear stops it.
I'm sure the publishers are afraid the books will be copied and distributed accross the internet for free, but there's nothing to stop this now. One could quickly type or scan any book into an electronic file now and put it on the internet. Why doesn't this happen? It doesn't happen because people don't want to be arrested or sued.
Subscription based services are where the music, video, and books industries are going eventually anyway, especially once we have fast wireless internet access everywhere. Why do they waste time dragging their feet and actually encourage piracy by their resistance.
AMAZON, PLEASE PUT BOOKS ONLINE AND ON YOUR KINDLE FOR A FLAT FEE.
p.s. I would buy an iPod for music but Steve Jobs doesn't think subscription makes sense. Well, I don't think buying music makes sense.
With Rhapsody I can listen to anything, anything at all and it cost a lot less money. Poor iPod users can only listen to what they've purchased and they spend a lot of money getting a very small fraction of what I can listen to. The Netflix model ROCKS.
Great Depression and Stock Market
When people think about the stock market crash that started the Great Depression, they think it crashed all the way on October 29, 1929. Actually the market only lost about 12% of its value that day.
The stock market actually took nearly 3 years to finally reach the bottom on July 8, 1932. On that date the market was 89% below the highest peak reached on September 3, 1929. So the stock market actually crashed slowly over about 34 months.
Since I thought back in November 2008 that we were as close to creating the conditions that initiated the Great Depression as we could be, I thought I would create a spreadsheet with the stock market data from 1929 through 1940's and see if our stock market now was following the same pattern.
I plugged in our stock market peak of 14,164.53 obtained in October, 2007, and then created a column with the same percentage drops matching the depression stock market data on a monthly basis. The pattern has been remarkably similar except the predictions keep coming with a 3 month delay.
The spreadsheet predicted we would reach the 6000's by December 2008 but we didn't reach it until March 2009. I've been watching the spreadsheet since early December and it has predicted each month well. Though I have to keep at it with a 3 month delay.
If the pattern continues we should bounce around the 6000's with a pop to the 7000's occasionally for about 6 months and then the market should capitulate down to the 5000's.
If we followed the pattern all the way down, then we would reach the bottom of 1600 around November of 2010.
Are you depressed yet? Amazingly, I am not. I don't expect the pattern to hold.
I think there are many differences between then and now.
Then, the Federal Reserve was doing exactly the wrong thing that made things worse. Now, the Federal Reserve is doing what it should be doing and doing it well.
Then, there was no FDIC to insure depositors accounts. Now we have that.
Then there was no unemployment insurance, now there is. These are safety nets they didn't have back then. I think these buffer the economic crash somewhat. These were good FDR policies.
Unfortunately, FDR created several policies that made things worse such as wage and price controls which actually decreased the number of jobs.
I worry that President Obama is making similar mistakes. Some of the policies I'm seeing I think will make it more difficult for small businesses to keep or hire employees.
I'm not ready to give up yet. I think at any point along the way we can still create policies that stop the crash and start a rebuild.
Fortunately, things do start to repair themselves. For example, everyone is saving again. That hurts the economy now but it does put more money in the banks which helps them to heal. Also, long term that built up stash will start looking real good for spending after a long enough time of deprivation. At some point you want to live a little and stop being afraid.
It may take a few years but eventually things will turn up. They always have. :-)
The stock market actually took nearly 3 years to finally reach the bottom on July 8, 1932. On that date the market was 89% below the highest peak reached on September 3, 1929. So the stock market actually crashed slowly over about 34 months.
Since I thought back in November 2008 that we were as close to creating the conditions that initiated the Great Depression as we could be, I thought I would create a spreadsheet with the stock market data from 1929 through 1940's and see if our stock market now was following the same pattern.
I plugged in our stock market peak of 14,164.53 obtained in October, 2007, and then created a column with the same percentage drops matching the depression stock market data on a monthly basis. The pattern has been remarkably similar except the predictions keep coming with a 3 month delay.
The spreadsheet predicted we would reach the 6000's by December 2008 but we didn't reach it until March 2009. I've been watching the spreadsheet since early December and it has predicted each month well. Though I have to keep at it with a 3 month delay.
If the pattern continues we should bounce around the 6000's with a pop to the 7000's occasionally for about 6 months and then the market should capitulate down to the 5000's.
If we followed the pattern all the way down, then we would reach the bottom of 1600 around November of 2010.
Are you depressed yet? Amazingly, I am not. I don't expect the pattern to hold.
I think there are many differences between then and now.
Then, the Federal Reserve was doing exactly the wrong thing that made things worse. Now, the Federal Reserve is doing what it should be doing and doing it well.
Then, there was no FDIC to insure depositors accounts. Now we have that.
Then there was no unemployment insurance, now there is. These are safety nets they didn't have back then. I think these buffer the economic crash somewhat. These were good FDR policies.
Unfortunately, FDR created several policies that made things worse such as wage and price controls which actually decreased the number of jobs.
I worry that President Obama is making similar mistakes. Some of the policies I'm seeing I think will make it more difficult for small businesses to keep or hire employees.
I'm not ready to give up yet. I think at any point along the way we can still create policies that stop the crash and start a rebuild.
Fortunately, things do start to repair themselves. For example, everyone is saving again. That hurts the economy now but it does put more money in the banks which helps them to heal. Also, long term that built up stash will start looking real good for spending after a long enough time of deprivation. At some point you want to live a little and stop being afraid.
It may take a few years but eventually things will turn up. They always have. :-)
Thinking of code
I tend to think of cellular DNA code as like a computer program. There are different parts of the code that gets called like subroutines in a computer program.
I think of cancer cells as containing damaged DNA code that is operating like a runaway computer program.
When I was a student in Computer Science at NC State, I use to laugh at freshmen who would frequently create runaway programs. A runaway program is a program that was accidentlly written in a way that would never stop like the program below. "i" will never be o or less so the computer will run the program forever. The author would probably have intended i = i - 1.
i = 10
while i > 0 do
i = i +1
print i
end
At that time in school the results from computer programs were printed out on computer paper. If a program ran away, you might get a 3 inch thick stack of paper. Fortunately, the computer had limits on how long a program could run or how much paper could be printed or the paper would never have stopped. (Yes, I wrote a runaway program once and got the stack of paper).
Just like one small change in the + sign or - sign in the statement i = i + 1 made the difference in a working program versus a catastrophic destruction of trees in paper use, I think a small change in a DNA code strand can create a runaway program in a cancer cell.
If researchers could compare active DNA strands in a normal cell with the active DNA code in a cancer I wonder if they could identify where the code is broken. I don't know if researchers have that kind of capability yet.
Interestingly enough, cells actually have internal DNA code that verifies that the other DNA code in the cell is working correctly. If the checking code finds a mistake it triggers other DNA code to terminate the cell so that it doesn't keep operating. This actually happens all the time in our bodies. Cells do make mistakes in our bodies and terminate. In cancer cells, either the code checks have failed or the terminate code has failed so the damaged cell keeps going and replicating. Since the exterior cell wall of the cancer cell still looks normal, the body's defense systems don't detect anything wrong and don't attack the bad cell. The cancer cell grows and replicates without anything to stop it.
If we could just understand how the code is broken maybe we could gain insight in how to cure cancer. But then again how would we fix the cancer cell code or terminate the cancer cell. How could we identify a runaway cell and how could we target it. I still wonder if the cell wall changes in some unique way in a metastasized cancer cell that would allow us to target it. Then maybe we could elminate the spread within the body and cancer would just become a chronic local condition instead of attacking the entire body.
I think of cancer cells as containing damaged DNA code that is operating like a runaway computer program.
When I was a student in Computer Science at NC State, I use to laugh at freshmen who would frequently create runaway programs. A runaway program is a program that was accidentlly written in a way that would never stop like the program below. "i" will never be o or less so the computer will run the program forever. The author would probably have intended i = i - 1.
i = 10
while i > 0 do
i = i +1
print i
end
At that time in school the results from computer programs were printed out on computer paper. If a program ran away, you might get a 3 inch thick stack of paper. Fortunately, the computer had limits on how long a program could run or how much paper could be printed or the paper would never have stopped. (Yes, I wrote a runaway program once and got the stack of paper).
Just like one small change in the + sign or - sign in the statement i = i + 1 made the difference in a working program versus a catastrophic destruction of trees in paper use, I think a small change in a DNA code strand can create a runaway program in a cancer cell.
If researchers could compare active DNA strands in a normal cell with the active DNA code in a cancer I wonder if they could identify where the code is broken. I don't know if researchers have that kind of capability yet.
Interestingly enough, cells actually have internal DNA code that verifies that the other DNA code in the cell is working correctly. If the checking code finds a mistake it triggers other DNA code to terminate the cell so that it doesn't keep operating. This actually happens all the time in our bodies. Cells do make mistakes in our bodies and terminate. In cancer cells, either the code checks have failed or the terminate code has failed so the damaged cell keeps going and replicating. Since the exterior cell wall of the cancer cell still looks normal, the body's defense systems don't detect anything wrong and don't attack the bad cell. The cancer cell grows and replicates without anything to stop it.
If we could just understand how the code is broken maybe we could gain insight in how to cure cancer. But then again how would we fix the cancer cell code or terminate the cancer cell. How could we identify a runaway cell and how could we target it. I still wonder if the cell wall changes in some unique way in a metastasized cancer cell that would allow us to target it. Then maybe we could elminate the spread within the body and cancer would just become a chronic local condition instead of attacking the entire body.
Why does it move
I talked in a February post about how do cells know to stay where they are to form the structures of our bodies. For example, how does a newly replicated bone cell know to stay where it is in the bone and not start replicating new cells in a random direction.
With that concept, I recently thought about metastasizing cancer cells. Cancer cells initially stay in the place of their origin, but eventually they reach a stage where they metastasize and start replicating and moving through out the body. At that point I wondered what has changed about that cancer cell. Why does it no longer stay in its place of origin. Has some gene suddenly turned on or off that then frees the cancer cell to wonder. Has the cell wall changed in some fashion.
First it would be interesting to understand what DNA code is turned off and on in a cancer cell versus a normal cell. Then it would be interesting to understand how the DNA code has again changed in a cancer cell that is free floating versus a stay in place cancer cell.
With that concept, I recently thought about metastasizing cancer cells. Cancer cells initially stay in the place of their origin, but eventually they reach a stage where they metastasize and start replicating and moving through out the body. At that point I wondered what has changed about that cancer cell. Why does it no longer stay in its place of origin. Has some gene suddenly turned on or off that then frees the cancer cell to wonder. Has the cell wall changed in some fashion.
First it would be interesting to understand what DNA code is turned off and on in a cancer cell versus a normal cell. Then it would be interesting to understand how the DNA code has again changed in a cancer cell that is free floating versus a stay in place cancer cell.
American Chavez...
First of all note that I like President Obama. I thinks he's a man of integrity and wants to do what's right.
However, I couldn't help but notice that some of his actions and those planned by his party could look suspicious.
So let me be a conspiracy nut for a minute and note some actions that are Hugo Chavez like in Venezuela.
1. Manipulate the Representative Assembly.
President Obama is moving the 2010 Census office from the Commerce Department directly into the White House. Someone could say he wants to manipulate the statistics in heavily Democratic states to increase their numbers in the House of Representatives.
2. Nationalize the Banks
Then the government can control how money is invested.
3. Suppress Dissent with the "Fairness Doctrine" act.
The Democrats don't like the many conservative talk radio shows which far outnumber liberal talk shows. The "Fairness Doctrine" would be an attempt to rein in those conservative shows under the guise of "creating balance". It doesn't matter that the American people are currently deciding and supporting the number of shows. The government should not be regulating speech. The "Fairness Doctrine" is not fair.
4. Intimidate the Opposition. Pass the "Employee Free Choice Act" act.
You've got to admit the Democrats have smartly employed a tactic from the pigs in Animal Farm by George Orwell. Name the bills the opposite of what they really do.
This bill should really be called the Eliminate Employee Free Choice Act. This act would remove the secret ballot for employees voting whether or not to have a union. Instead of a secret ballot, each employee that wanted a union would sign a public card stating so. After enough cards were signed a union could be introduced. This is a great opportunity for the union. Union thugs can intimidate employees into signing cards just like the Chavistas intimidate voters in Venezuela. Everyone knows who signed and who didn't. More union members mean more money for unions and more money for the Democratic party.
Okay, that's enough consiracy theory nuttery for today.
I don't really think there is some "great plan" in the works to grab power, but I do think people can act and vote without realizing their preferences are leading them down a path best not to go.
However, I couldn't help but notice that some of his actions and those planned by his party could look suspicious.
So let me be a conspiracy nut for a minute and note some actions that are Hugo Chavez like in Venezuela.
1. Manipulate the Representative Assembly.
President Obama is moving the 2010 Census office from the Commerce Department directly into the White House. Someone could say he wants to manipulate the statistics in heavily Democratic states to increase their numbers in the House of Representatives.
2. Nationalize the Banks
Then the government can control how money is invested.
3. Suppress Dissent with the "Fairness Doctrine" act.
The Democrats don't like the many conservative talk radio shows which far outnumber liberal talk shows. The "Fairness Doctrine" would be an attempt to rein in those conservative shows under the guise of "creating balance". It doesn't matter that the American people are currently deciding and supporting the number of shows. The government should not be regulating speech. The "Fairness Doctrine" is not fair.
4. Intimidate the Opposition. Pass the "Employee Free Choice Act" act.
You've got to admit the Democrats have smartly employed a tactic from the pigs in Animal Farm by George Orwell. Name the bills the opposite of what they really do.
This bill should really be called the Eliminate Employee Free Choice Act. This act would remove the secret ballot for employees voting whether or not to have a union. Instead of a secret ballot, each employee that wanted a union would sign a public card stating so. After enough cards were signed a union could be introduced. This is a great opportunity for the union. Union thugs can intimidate employees into signing cards just like the Chavistas intimidate voters in Venezuela. Everyone knows who signed and who didn't. More union members mean more money for unions and more money for the Democratic party.
Okay, that's enough consiracy theory nuttery for today.
I don't really think there is some "great plan" in the works to grab power, but I do think people can act and vote without realizing their preferences are leading them down a path best not to go.
Democrats drunk with power
NY Times Article: A Moderate Manifesto by David Brooks (free access)
The Democrats think their majority win in the election was a mandate for far left ideology. I think they're drunk with power with comments like we won and we will make the decisions.
The article above is a good shot by moderates at the increasing excesses of the Democratic left in power now.
The Democrats think their majority win in the election was a mandate for far left ideology. I think they're drunk with power with comments like we won and we will make the decisions.
The article above is a good shot by moderates at the increasing excesses of the Democratic left in power now.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Democrats working to doom school vouchers in D.C.
Article: Will Obama Stand Up for These Kids? probably requires a subscription to WSJ.
The Wall Street Journal had an article today about two students who attend the Washington D.C. school that President Obama's daughters now attend. These two students and others attend this school with school vouchers granted to inner city kids from low income families. These kids otherwise would not be able to attend this school.
The Democrats have added language to a bill to allow this voucher program to die in 2010. At that point these two students will no longer be able to attend this good school but must return to their failing local public school which has low graduation rates, metal detectors at the doors, and security guards.
The Democratic party supports the teacher unions in their campaign to stamp out school vouchers. School vouchers give parents a choice. Teacher unions do not want this choice. The Democratic leaders send their kids to private schools and deny that right to poor people condeming them to failing schools and continued poverty.
Interestingly, President Obama has an awkward position on school reform. His party supports the public school status quo, but he espouses change. Let me end with a quote.
"The biggest source of resistance [to reform]," he said, "was rarely talked about . . . namely, the uncomfortable fact that every one of our churches was filled with teachers, principals, and district superintendents. Few of these educators sent their own children to public schools; they knew too much for that. But they would defend the status quo with the same skill and vigor as their white counterparts of two decades before." -- said by President Obama when he was a community organizer in Chicago.
What will he do before these kids lose this opportunity?
The Wall Street Journal had an article today about two students who attend the Washington D.C. school that President Obama's daughters now attend. These two students and others attend this school with school vouchers granted to inner city kids from low income families. These kids otherwise would not be able to attend this school.
The Democrats have added language to a bill to allow this voucher program to die in 2010. At that point these two students will no longer be able to attend this good school but must return to their failing local public school which has low graduation rates, metal detectors at the doors, and security guards.
The Democratic party supports the teacher unions in their campaign to stamp out school vouchers. School vouchers give parents a choice. Teacher unions do not want this choice. The Democratic leaders send their kids to private schools and deny that right to poor people condeming them to failing schools and continued poverty.
Interestingly, President Obama has an awkward position on school reform. His party supports the public school status quo, but he espouses change. Let me end with a quote.
"The biggest source of resistance [to reform]," he said, "was rarely talked about . . . namely, the uncomfortable fact that every one of our churches was filled with teachers, principals, and district superintendents. Few of these educators sent their own children to public schools; they knew too much for that. But they would defend the status quo with the same skill and vigor as their white counterparts of two decades before." -- said by President Obama when he was a community organizer in Chicago.
What will he do before these kids lose this opportunity?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)