Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Dwayne Spradlin, president and chief executive of InnoCentive, said in an interview that the company had solved 250 challenges, for prizes typically in the $10,000 to $25,000 range. According to the Web site (http://www.innocentive.com/), the achievements include a compound for skin tanning, a method of preventing snack chip breakage and a mini-extruder in brick-making.Defenders of globalization in the US point to the country's lead in innovation. But what if global companies realize they can outsource problem-solving?
On the other hand, more often than not the real challenge is identifying the right problem to solve in the first place. In my experience, few big organizations have a clue as to what problems they really should be solving.
Monday, July 21, 2008
Thursday, July 17, 2008
- borrowing money from china to buy oil from middle east. that has to change.Meredith said it.
- [. . .] bold, new strategy to empower America: 100% of energy electricity and renewable and carbon-free sources within 10 years.
- Has he been talking with Boone Pickens? I hope so.
- Wind, solar, etc. getting cheaper and cheaper.
Dammit, CNN cut him off and now I’m watching McCain at a Kansas City Town Hall meeting talking about dependency on foreign oil and alternative energy resources and nuclear power. [ . . . ] Wow, CNN - this is sooooo much more important than a new energy initiative proposed by a former presidential candidate. Morons.
* Read a transcript of the speech.
Photo by Jotman shows fireworks on the Fourth of July, 2008.
Sunday, July 13, 2008
Howard Kurtz of The Washington Post said Sunday on his CNN media show “Reliable Sources” that the cover is arguably “incendiary.”Politico
“I talked to the editor of The New Yorker, David Remnick, who tells me this is a satire, that they are making fun of all the rumors,” Kurtz added.
Clarence Page of the Chicago Tribune defended it as “quite within the normal realms of journalism,” adding that “it's just lampooning all the crazy ignorance out there.”
The panelists agreed it would succeed in its goal of getting attention.
. . . Supreme Court Justice David Souter wrote that Exxon's recklessness was ''profitless'' - so the company shouldn't have to pay punitive damages. Profitless, Mr. Souter? Exxon and its oil shipping partners saved billions - BILLIONS - by operating for sixteen years without the oil spill safety equipment they promised, in writing, under oath and by contract.
Friday, July 11, 2008
"Any citizen of this United States who is not involved in some illegal activity has nothing to fear."
"There is nothing to fear in the [new FISA] bill, unless you have Al Qaeda on your speed dial."*
* Marty Lederman blogs, "It's simply not true . . . The new statute permits the NSA to intercept phone calls and e-mails between the U.S. and a foreign location, without making any showing to a court and without judicial oversight, whether or not the communication has anything to do with al Qaeda -- indeed, even if there is no evidence that the communication has anything to do with terrorism, or any threat to national security." (H/t Glenn Greenwald).
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Thursday, July 3, 2008
. . an independent monitor must watch the watchers to prevent abuses and to protect the civil liberties of the American people. This compromise law assures that the FISA court has that responsibility.
Glenn Greenwald (responding to above claim):
This is just false. The new FISA bill that Obama supports vests new categories of warrantless eavesdropping powers in the President (.pdf), and allows the Government, for the first time, to tap physically into U.S. telecommunications networks inside our country with no individual warrant requirement. To claim that this new bill creates "an independent monitor [to] watch the watchers to prevent abuses and to protect the civil liberties of the American people" is truly misleading, since the new FISA bill actually does the opposite -- it frees the Government from exactly that monitoring in all sorts of broad categories.Daniel Larison, a conservative blogger observes: "Obama supports giving the government and this administration the unchecked power to spy on anyone they choose to spy on. That’s pretty inspiring, isn’t it?"*
The telecommunications companies complied with a government request after being assured, in writing, that the activities had been authorized by the president and deemed lawful by the attorney general. Punishing them by forcing them to endure the cost and hassle of lawsuits would be counter- productive to securing such cooperation in the future, while offering little prospect of a useful outcome.Greg Greenwald, who has blogged the FISA controversy extensively, comments:
Incidentally, the section of the The Washington Post where the editorial defending the telecommunications industry appeared came wrapped in a full page color advertisement for Sprint, and an entire section of the paper was named after AT&T! (above photo) Moreover, the only two-page color advertisement appearing in the front section of the current issue is for T-mobile. At today's Washington Post it certainly appears as if securing advertiser revenue comes before the defense of the public interest.
. . . with this new FISA bill, our political establishment is doing what it now habitually does: namely, ensuring that the political and corporate elite who break our laws on purpose are immune from consequences. . . .
This history of the telecoms -- faring no better in court than the President has -- gives the lie to Fred Hiatt's deeply (and typically) dishonest Washington Post Editorial today -- by way of praising Obama's FISA stance -- that telecom immunity is a good idea because "The likelihood of prevailing -- or even getting very far -- with such lawsuits is low." The exact opposite is true: it's precisely because the telecoms know they are in severe danger of losing in court -- because they broke multiple laws -- that they and the White House are so desperate for amnesty.