See below:
Grover Norquist (president of Americans for Tax Reform and one of the leading Republican think-tank hawks in Washington, D.C.) has just joined forces with Democrats and the ACLU in calling for President Bush to reverse his position on wiretaps (though no mention has been yet made of torture). Norquist says he is doing this because he is a Republican and a friend of the President, and he feels that somebody like that needs to say this now. Though Norquist wants to see the terrorists caught/killed, he does not want that outcome at the expense of the liberties upon which this country was founded.
When Norquist comes out against a Republican President on any issue, you know something is up. This issue matters. You probably won't see this on ABC/CBS/NBC/CNN/FOX/etc. T.V. news anytime soon, but word will creep out. Torture and the invasion of the privacy of Americans will not be tolerated by the people of this country. Driving SUVs, drilling in the arctic, and running the government bankrupt to fight unnecessary foreign wars... that's another thing. But apparently, a line in the sand has been drawn, and the Bush administration has crossed it.
Impeachment does seem unlikely... but add this to the current corruption scandal, and it certainly seems like the tide may be turning, the pendulum losing momentum and beginning the turn-around for the swing back.
see for yourself:
************
Political opposites aligned against Bush wiretaps
- James Sterngold, Chronicle Staff Writer
Thursday, January 26, 2006
Larry Diamond, a Democrat and a Hoover Institution senior fellow, went to Baghdad in 2004 as a consultant for the U.S.-run Coalition Provisional Authority, believing strongly in the Bush administration's goal of building a democracy there. While critical of many aspects of the Iraq war, he has, he says, wholeheartedly supported President Bush's aggressive approach to the war on terror.
Grover Norquist is one of the most influential conservative Republicans in Washington. His weekly "Wednesday Meeting" at his L Street office is a must for conservative strategists, and he has been called the "managing director of the hard-core right" by the liberal Nation magazine. Perhaps the country's leading anti-tax enthusiast, he is, like Diamond, a hawk in the war on terror.
Despite coming from opposite ends of the political spectrum, they agree on one other major issue: that the Bush administration's program of domestic eavesdropping by the National Security Agency without obtaining court warrants has less to do with the war on terror than with threats to the nation's civil liberties.
"My view on the terrorists is that we should find all of them and kill them," said Norquist. "But we should also protect our civil liberties, which the terrorists are trying to destroy."
Diamond, whose academic specialty is the building of democracies, has taken his opposition one step further, joining a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union last week to halt the president's program.
"I teach about democracy and the rule of law, the quality of a democracy," he said. "I meet so many people around the world who want to look up to the American model, and a spying program like this really harms us."
Bush and his senior officials have defended the wiretaps as essential in a time of war, while many White House and GOP officials have attempted to characterize opposition as coming mostly from partisan Democrats critical of the war in Iraq. In a speech to the Republican National Committee last Friday, Karl Rove, the president's chief strategist, accused Democrats of making "wild and reckless and false charges" on the wiretap issue.
But, in fact, a number of prominent Republicans, including Sen. John McCain of Arizona, have criticized Bush and the wiretapping without court warrants as a violation of the law and basic civil liberties. So have other well-known conservatives, including former Rep. Bob Barr of Georgia. Bruce Fein, a lawyer who worked in the Justice Department under President Ronald Reagan, wrote in a commentary in the Washington Times last week that Bush should face "possible impeachment" if the practice is not stopped.
"There have been as many Republicans as Democrats who've spoken out on the issue," Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., said Tuesday as he stated that the Senate Judiciary Committee, which he heads, will begin hearings on the matter on Feb. 6.
Norquist and Diamond explained in interviews why this odd alliance has come together in spite of the bitter divisions between left and right on most other political issues.
Diamond, who also teaches at Stanford University, is an expert on democratic development -- the reason he was hired as a consultant for the Coalition Provisional Authority by his old friend and former Stanford colleague Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.
He says that, though he is a Democrat, his focus is civil liberties, not the president.
"I give Bush credit for his vigilance since 9/11," said Diamond. "I'm very much in sympathy with the need to monitor al Qaeda and terrorists, to uproot them, interdict them, catch them and when necessary to kill them. But we can't roll over on something like this."
Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, says he knows some fellow conservatives have labeled him a traitor for condemning the same administration that instituted the biggest tax cuts in recent American history -- cuts for which Norquist vigorously lobbied. But an even greater disloyalty, Norquist responds, would be to allow what he regards as the trampling on civil liberties to go unimpeded.
"The president's friends are exactly who you want telling him this," said Norquist. "No one else has the credibility. We are being team players by telling him, not by keeping quiet."
Norquist said one of his main concerns is that, once the government becomes so intrusive, there is no way to prevent continued erosion of individual rights.
"Even if you believed an angel was making these decisions, and that's not what I'm saying, at some point the person in the White House will change," he said. "Hillary Clinton might be making these decisions."
The New York Times first disclosed last month that the president had approved a program under which the NSA had been intercepting an apparently large volume of communications to and from the United States without first obtaining special court approval, as required by the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
But the president and senior administration officials insist that Congress gave the president the authority to bypass that law. They also say that the extraordinary threat presented by terrorist groups require such measures. Initially, most national opinion polls narrowly favored the administration's position, but polls released this week show a majority in favor of obtaining a warrant before such surveillance is permitted.
Last Tuesday, the ACLU and the New York-based Center for Constitutional Rights filed separate lawsuits in federal courts seeking to stop the administration from the eavesdropping without obtaining warrants.
Joining the ACLU suit were a mix of supporters and opponents of the Bush administration, including Diamond, James Bamford, who has written several books on the NSA, and Christopher Hitchens, a columnist who vocally supported the Bush administration's invasion of Iraq and has written extensively about the threat posed by "Islamo-fascism," the term he uses to characterize the ideology of al Qaeda.
Diamond and the others who have signed on to the ACLU suit say they suspect that some of their overseas communications might have been intercepted.
Diamond also fears that some researchers, especially in the Middle East, will stop communicating with him for fear they might be caught in the NSA's electronic net, making it harder for him to continue his own work on democratic development in countries like Egypt and Iraq.
And, like Norquist, Diamond worries about how the Bush administration or others might use the wiretap information.
"That information could be sitting in a database somewhere for a long time," said Diamond. "It might be there not just for this administration, but for anyone.
"That data could be mined for any reason," he added. "It's frightening."
Norquist is not a party to either suit, but he has been outspoken in criticizing his party's leader. He said that he had brushed aside concerns that he was harming the president or being disloyal at a critical time.
"You need someone who is a Republican to call the president on this," he said.
Norquist said, ironically, he was particularly concerned about the problem because the Democrats appeared to be so weak.
"For 40 years we always assumed the left would take care of our civil liberties," he said. "If there were problems, the Democrats were the ones who would push back. But now with a Republican Congress and a Republican in the White House, the ACLU can't get their calls returned."
Referring to what some see as a conflict between fighting vicious terrorists and upholding all civil liberties, Norquist said: "It's not either/or. If the president thinks he needs different tools, pass a law to get them. Don't break the existing laws."
E-mail James Sterngold at jsterngold@sfchronicle.com.
Page A - 1
URL: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/01/26/MNG24GTB8O1.DTL
©2006 San Francisco Chronicle
Thursday, January 26, 2006
Wednesday, January 18, 2006
Fixing health care in this country
Health care in the U.S., as a system, is broken. Does this mean that you or I can no longer get coverage? No. This means that the system as a whole, costs too much with relation to the services that it provides. The price is high beyond justification.
Paul Krugman has written many articles on this topic. One of the latest makes a bogeyman out of health savings accounts, as created in 2003 by the Bush Administration:
"In practice, the health savings accounts created by the 2003 Medicare law will serve primarily as tax shelters for the wealthy. But let's put justified cynicism about Bush administration policies aside: is giving individuals responsibility for their own health spending really the answer to rising costs? No."
source: http://paulkrugmanarchive.blogspot.com/2005/12/medicine-who-decides.html
Personally, I'm on the fence about this. I would like for my naturopath to be my primary care physician, but my health plan does not allow this. Perhaps a personal health savings account would allow me to pay for my naturopathic visits using my pre-tax health care benefit, rather than having to pay for most of it out of pocket. If I'm misunderstanding the nature of this benefit or how I might be able to use it, I'd like to know.
In another article, Krugman writes:
"Several readers have asked me a good question: we rely on free markets to deliver most goods and services, so why shouldn't we do the same thing for health care? Some correspondents were belligerent, others honestly curious. Either way, they deserve an answer."
source: http://paulkrugmanarchive.blogspot.com/2005/11/health-economics-101.html
This is the one to read for a really good argument for nationalizing our national health care system. Incidentally, Oregon's former governor John Kitzhaber, a former medical-room physician from Roseburg, OR, has presented a plan for Oregon as a state to do exactly that. He's calling it the Archimedes Movement:
http://archimedesmovement.org/index.html
...and he's posted a manifesto there, one that does a good job, over 10 pages, of outlining the problem with the U.S. health care system, and intimating what the shape of the ultimate solution might look like. In case you fear that this might be dry reading, here's a quote from near the end:
"Albert Einstein once said, “We can’t solve today’s problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.” That is true. But I think that Edward Abbey -- the late Western novelist -- put it more succinctly, if not as eloquently when he said: “Society is like a stew. If you don’t stir it up you get a lot of scum on the top.”
The manifesto, entitled Road to Revolution, is at: http://archimedesmovement.org/documents/Road_to_Revolution.pdf
So, let me close this blog post by quoting directly from Kitzhaber's manifesto, in fact, his closing statement:
Let me close with the words of Oregon poet Kim Stafford who eloquently defines the
challenge, the opportunity – and, indeed, the responsibility -- that lies before us in what he calls “Lloyd’s Story.” Lloyd Reynolds, the international citizen of Portland, spent his last days in pain, silent, unable to speak or to write, lying in his hospital bed. On his last day at home, as his wife scurried to pack his suitcase for the hospital, Lloyd made his way outside to the garden and there she found him on his knees, with a spoon, awkwardly planting flower bulbs. “Lloyd,” she said, “you will never see these flowers bloom.”
He smiled at her. “They are not for me,” he said, “they are for you. The salmon
coming home? They are for you. The calls of the wild geese? They are for you. The
last old trees? They are for you and your children, to the seventh generation and
beyond. They are all blooming into being for you.”
That is our challenge today. To plant the seeds of tomorrow; to change the world by
acting, by leading, by personally reengaging in this struggle -- not as victims of the status quo, but as architects of a new future.
Paul Krugman has written many articles on this topic. One of the latest makes a bogeyman out of health savings accounts, as created in 2003 by the Bush Administration:
"In practice, the health savings accounts created by the 2003 Medicare law will serve primarily as tax shelters for the wealthy. But let's put justified cynicism about Bush administration policies aside: is giving individuals responsibility for their own health spending really the answer to rising costs? No."
source: http://paulkrugmanarchive.blogspot.com/2005/12/medicine-who-decides.html
Personally, I'm on the fence about this. I would like for my naturopath to be my primary care physician, but my health plan does not allow this. Perhaps a personal health savings account would allow me to pay for my naturopathic visits using my pre-tax health care benefit, rather than having to pay for most of it out of pocket. If I'm misunderstanding the nature of this benefit or how I might be able to use it, I'd like to know.
In another article, Krugman writes:
"Several readers have asked me a good question: we rely on free markets to deliver most goods and services, so why shouldn't we do the same thing for health care? Some correspondents were belligerent, others honestly curious. Either way, they deserve an answer."
source: http://paulkrugmanarchive.blogspot.com/2005/11/health-economics-101.html
This is the one to read for a really good argument for nationalizing our national health care system. Incidentally, Oregon's former governor John Kitzhaber, a former medical-room physician from Roseburg, OR, has presented a plan for Oregon as a state to do exactly that. He's calling it the Archimedes Movement:
http://archimedesmovement.org/index.html
...and he's posted a manifesto there, one that does a good job, over 10 pages, of outlining the problem with the U.S. health care system, and intimating what the shape of the ultimate solution might look like. In case you fear that this might be dry reading, here's a quote from near the end:
"Albert Einstein once said, “We can’t solve today’s problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.” That is true. But I think that Edward Abbey -- the late Western novelist -- put it more succinctly, if not as eloquently when he said: “Society is like a stew. If you don’t stir it up you get a lot of scum on the top.”
The manifesto, entitled Road to Revolution, is at: http://archimedesmovement.org/documents/Road_to_Revolution.pdf
So, let me close this blog post by quoting directly from Kitzhaber's manifesto, in fact, his closing statement:
Let me close with the words of Oregon poet Kim Stafford who eloquently defines the
challenge, the opportunity – and, indeed, the responsibility -- that lies before us in what he calls “Lloyd’s Story.” Lloyd Reynolds, the international citizen of Portland, spent his last days in pain, silent, unable to speak or to write, lying in his hospital bed. On his last day at home, as his wife scurried to pack his suitcase for the hospital, Lloyd made his way outside to the garden and there she found him on his knees, with a spoon, awkwardly planting flower bulbs. “Lloyd,” she said, “you will never see these flowers bloom.”
He smiled at her. “They are not for me,” he said, “they are for you. The salmon
coming home? They are for you. The calls of the wild geese? They are for you. The
last old trees? They are for you and your children, to the seventh generation and
beyond. They are all blooming into being for you.”
That is our challenge today. To plant the seeds of tomorrow; to change the world by
acting, by leading, by personally reengaging in this struggle -- not as victims of the status quo, but as architects of a new future.
Tuesday, January 03, 2006
30 Beers to have on tap
Somebody recently asked "If you were to wander into a bar with 30 beers on tap, which 30 would they be, in your perfect world?"
Golly, what a question. Here's my answer today:
1. Hair of the Dog: Ruth
2. Bridgeport: IPA
3. Deschutes: Black Butte Porter
4. Rogue: Dead Guy
5. Lagunitas: 10
6: Widmer: Drop Top Amber
7. MacTarnahans: Amber
8. Bridgeport: Ebeneezer
9. Deschutes: Jubelale
10. Hair of the Dog: Doggie Claws
11. Widmer: Snow Plow
12. Full Sail: Wreck The Halls
13. Full Sail: Wassail
14. Full Sail: Sessions Lager
15: Full Sail: IPA
16: Bridgeport: Pintail Copper Ale
17: MacTarnahans: Mac Frost
18: MacTarnahans: Black Watch Porter
19: Rogue: Morimoto Black Obi Soba Ale
20: Hair of the Dog: Fred
21: Lagunitas: Censored
22: Deschutes: Cascade Ale
23: Deschutes: Obsidian Stout
24: Pelican: MacPelican's Scottish Style Ale
25: Rogue: Shakespeare Stout
26: Hair of the Dog: Rose
27: Caledonian: 80/-
28: Murphys: Irish Stout
29: Widmer: Dopplebock
30: Salvator: Dopplebock
cheers,
~Garlynn
Golly, what a question. Here's my answer today:
1. Hair of the Dog: Ruth
2. Bridgeport: IPA
3. Deschutes: Black Butte Porter
4. Rogue: Dead Guy
5. Lagunitas: 10
6: Widmer: Drop Top Amber
7. MacTarnahans: Amber
8. Bridgeport: Ebeneezer
9. Deschutes: Jubelale
10. Hair of the Dog: Doggie Claws
11. Widmer: Snow Plow
12. Full Sail: Wreck The Halls
13. Full Sail: Wassail
14. Full Sail: Sessions Lager
15: Full Sail: IPA
16: Bridgeport: Pintail Copper Ale
17: MacTarnahans: Mac Frost
18: MacTarnahans: Black Watch Porter
19: Rogue: Morimoto Black Obi Soba Ale
20: Hair of the Dog: Fred
21: Lagunitas: Censored
22: Deschutes: Cascade Ale
23: Deschutes: Obsidian Stout
24: Pelican: MacPelican's Scottish Style Ale
25: Rogue: Shakespeare Stout
26: Hair of the Dog: Rose
27: Caledonian: 80/-
28: Murphys: Irish Stout
29: Widmer: Dopplebock
30: Salvator: Dopplebock
cheers,
~Garlynn
My ideal hybrid diesel/electric all-purpose vehicle
What would my ideal vehicle be, for driving from America to Argentina nonstop (except perhaps for the ferry from Panama to Ecuador)?
It would be based on something that was a cross between a Jeep Commander, a Toyota Pathfinder, a Jeep Liberty, a Subaru Forester, a Saturn VUE, a Volvo Cross Country and a Unimog. Basically, it would:
* Seat 5 normally, with the option for a 3rd row of seating in a pinch to accommodate 7-8
* Be light-weight, with the polymer body panels that Saturn uses on all their vehicles
* Be tough, with skid plates underneath it to protect from rocks, etc.
* Be truly 4wd, with the ability to drive in loose sand, mud, potholes, dirt roads, as well as city streets and on the freeway
* Not necessarily be the fastest thing around, but be able to keep up with traffic and pass slower vehicles without needing an airplane runway to get the speed up to do so.
* Climb hills steadily carrying a heavy load
* Hold a winch on the front bumper to allow it to get out of a pinch, or pull another vehicle out, or do the other things that winches allow for
* Have a heavy-duty roof rack on top that could carry the cargo for 4-5 people on a 2-week (or 1-year) journey, in combination with the storage space below
* Have a rear-mounted spare tire that also had room for a spare gas (diesel) can
* Have fog lamps
* Have crush protection for all lights, so they wouldn't get smashed by debris
* Operate using a hybrid diesel-electric powertrain, possibly one with a separate electric motor for low and another for high speeds.
* Have the ability to run entirely off of battery-electric power until the batteries run nearly dry
* Have the ability to use biodiesel/SVO
* Get at least 45mpg on diesel fuel, averaged between highway and city (but not less than 42 in either situation).
* Have at least a 450-mi range on a single tank of gas (preferably 500mi)
* Have rollover protection -- it must not roll unless driven in the most extreme/insane situations, such as at 50mph on a 15% slope while turning the wrong direction (i.e. it shouldn't roll in any situation that a regular passenger car would not roll in). Volvo, I believe, can already make this claim with its SUVs.
* Potentially have solar panels to assist with charging the battery to provide additional motive power (hey, this might help increase fuel economy by another 5 mpg, right?)
* Be able to tow a trailer (though not necessarily quickly)
* Have durable leather seating (I haven't met any other type of seat that I like as much as leather in an automobile)
* Have the potential for a 50-year life span (or even 100 if well-maintained and lucky), assuming that some parts would need replacement or refurbishment at semi-regular intervals (batteries, tires, windshield wipers, etc.)
* Have at least a 10-year/250,000-mile warranty on the essential systems (drivetrains, computers, etc.) ...if you're going to build it, build it right!
* Have a good sound system with a subwoofer, at least 4 tops, and an RCA aux-in port
* Cost less than $50,000 (And I'd prefer $30-35,000!!!) with all of the above features.
* Have a good security system engineered into it from the beginning, so you could park it anywhere without fear of what might happen to it while you're away. Part of this would be not looking too flashy, fading into the background, having shatter-proof glass, good solid electronic locks, electronic ignition lockout, good
* Have oh-shit handles accessible to every passenger that will not break under any circumstances or loads
* Have cargo hooks in every conceivable useful location
* Have rubber/waterproof floors and durable interior materials throughout. Not necessarily be able to spray down the interior with a hose, but at least be able to wash it and maintain it for 50 years without it rotting/molding/mildewing if it gets wet repeatedly/prolongedly or if somebody spills their coffee/soda/etc on it.
Sure, I'd pay up to $50,000 for a vehicle that was engineered to last 50 years and guaranteed for the first 10 to have the manufacturer replace faulty parts for free! Especially if it could go anywhere and do anything, with finesse and style!
UC Davis, NUMMI, anybody else care to partner up and/or take these specs and run with them? I'd like to test-drive this sucker in 2007.
cheers,
~Garlynn
It would be based on something that was a cross between a Jeep Commander, a Toyota Pathfinder, a Jeep Liberty, a Subaru Forester, a Saturn VUE, a Volvo Cross Country and a Unimog. Basically, it would:
* Seat 5 normally, with the option for a 3rd row of seating in a pinch to accommodate 7-8
* Be light-weight, with the polymer body panels that Saturn uses on all their vehicles
* Be tough, with skid plates underneath it to protect from rocks, etc.
* Be truly 4wd, with the ability to drive in loose sand, mud, potholes, dirt roads, as well as city streets and on the freeway
* Not necessarily be the fastest thing around, but be able to keep up with traffic and pass slower vehicles without needing an airplane runway to get the speed up to do so.
* Climb hills steadily carrying a heavy load
* Hold a winch on the front bumper to allow it to get out of a pinch, or pull another vehicle out, or do the other things that winches allow for
* Have a heavy-duty roof rack on top that could carry the cargo for 4-5 people on a 2-week (or 1-year) journey, in combination with the storage space below
* Have a rear-mounted spare tire that also had room for a spare gas (diesel) can
* Have fog lamps
* Have crush protection for all lights, so they wouldn't get smashed by debris
* Operate using a hybrid diesel-electric powertrain, possibly one with a separate electric motor for low and another for high speeds.
* Have the ability to run entirely off of battery-electric power until the batteries run nearly dry
* Have the ability to use biodiesel/SVO
* Get at least 45mpg on diesel fuel, averaged between highway and city (but not less than 42 in either situation).
* Have at least a 450-mi range on a single tank of gas (preferably 500mi)
* Have rollover protection -- it must not roll unless driven in the most extreme/insane situations, such as at 50mph on a 15% slope while turning the wrong direction (i.e. it shouldn't roll in any situation that a regular passenger car would not roll in). Volvo, I believe, can already make this claim with its SUVs.
* Potentially have solar panels to assist with charging the battery to provide additional motive power (hey, this might help increase fuel economy by another 5 mpg, right?)
* Be able to tow a trailer (though not necessarily quickly)
* Have durable leather seating (I haven't met any other type of seat that I like as much as leather in an automobile)
* Have the potential for a 50-year life span (or even 100 if well-maintained and lucky), assuming that some parts would need replacement or refurbishment at semi-regular intervals (batteries, tires, windshield wipers, etc.)
* Have at least a 10-year/250,000-mile warranty on the essential systems (drivetrains, computers, etc.) ...if you're going to build it, build it right!
* Have a good sound system with a subwoofer, at least 4 tops, and an RCA aux-in port
* Cost less than $50,000 (And I'd prefer $30-35,000!!!) with all of the above features.
* Have a good security system engineered into it from the beginning, so you could park it anywhere without fear of what might happen to it while you're away. Part of this would be not looking too flashy, fading into the background, having shatter-proof glass, good solid electronic locks, electronic ignition lockout, good
* Have oh-shit handles accessible to every passenger that will not break under any circumstances or loads
* Have cargo hooks in every conceivable useful location
* Have rubber/waterproof floors and durable interior materials throughout. Not necessarily be able to spray down the interior with a hose, but at least be able to wash it and maintain it for 50 years without it rotting/molding/mildewing if it gets wet repeatedly/prolongedly or if somebody spills their coffee/soda/etc on it.
Sure, I'd pay up to $50,000 for a vehicle that was engineered to last 50 years and guaranteed for the first 10 to have the manufacturer replace faulty parts for free! Especially if it could go anywhere and do anything, with finesse and style!
UC Davis, NUMMI, anybody else care to partner up and/or take these specs and run with them? I'd like to test-drive this sucker in 2007.
cheers,
~Garlynn
Wednesday, December 14, 2005
Friday, December 09, 2005
Open letter to Oregon governor Ted Kulongoski
Dear Gov. Kulongoski and members of the Environmental Quality Commission,
Thank you for protecting the Oregon we love.
I applaud your efforts to bring Clean Cars to Oregon and make our state a leader in curbing global warming.
The auto industry is laying off thousand of workers now, and may be heading into a slump. Why? Because they are out of touch with consumers. Rather than build fuel-efficient cars using hybrid technology and other available methods, they have over-focused on speed, power and size, with the result that most of the available vehicle lineup gets poor gas mileage and is thus not very palatable to a large segment of the consuming marketplace. There are no waiting lists for any of the large American-made SUVs currently for sale; in fact, most American-made cars would not sell at all without huge incentive programs on the part of the auto companies. However, the hybrid vehicles in the market all have waiting lists. Why? Because the industry is out of touch with the market. When the industry sues Oregon or otherwise seeks to block the will of the people, it only alienates itself from the customer base even further. I expect that most American auto companies will either file for bankruptcy, be acquired by other auto companies or adopt a policy to make fuel-efficiency and alternative fuels their first priority within a fairly short timeframe, due to the current market forces.
I applaud you in your effort to try to force these companies to wake up to reality. They don't get it. You do. Thanks.
Sincerely,
Garlynn G. Woodsong
Background:
The Clean Cars program will fight global warming by requiring automakers to use existing technology to reduce emissions from new cars and light trucks. By adopting the program, Oregon will continue its tradition of environmental leadership.
The Governor has pledged his support, and his Department of Environmental Quality has put forward a formal proposal to adopt the Clean Cars program. Oregon's Environmental Quality Commission will vote on the program on December 22.
But the auto industry is pulling out all the stops, including suing Oregon, to prevent the state from adopting the Clean Cars program. The auto industry lawsuit is likely to fail, but industry lobbyists have said that they "will use every arrow in our quiver to try to stop Oregon from adopting standards we disagree with."
While some in the auto industry opposes this effective program to clean up global warming pollution from cars and light trucks, Oregonians across the state support it. In just the last couple of months, more than 4,000 people have put their names on thank-you cards to the Governor, over 1,200 people sent in comments to the governor's task force on clean cars in support of the program, and over 3,000 people sent emails to auto dealerships and held rallies around Oregon urging dealerships to drop the lawsuit and instead support clean cars.
The December 22nd vote by the Environmental Quality Commission on rules proposed by Gov. Kulongoski's Department of Environmental Quality for the adoption of the Clean Cars program in Oregon is fast approaching.
Thank you for protecting the Oregon we love.
I applaud your efforts to bring Clean Cars to Oregon and make our state a leader in curbing global warming.
The auto industry is laying off thousand of workers now, and may be heading into a slump. Why? Because they are out of touch with consumers. Rather than build fuel-efficient cars using hybrid technology and other available methods, they have over-focused on speed, power and size, with the result that most of the available vehicle lineup gets poor gas mileage and is thus not very palatable to a large segment of the consuming marketplace. There are no waiting lists for any of the large American-made SUVs currently for sale; in fact, most American-made cars would not sell at all without huge incentive programs on the part of the auto companies. However, the hybrid vehicles in the market all have waiting lists. Why? Because the industry is out of touch with the market. When the industry sues Oregon or otherwise seeks to block the will of the people, it only alienates itself from the customer base even further. I expect that most American auto companies will either file for bankruptcy, be acquired by other auto companies or adopt a policy to make fuel-efficiency and alternative fuels their first priority within a fairly short timeframe, due to the current market forces.
I applaud you in your effort to try to force these companies to wake up to reality. They don't get it. You do. Thanks.
Sincerely,
Garlynn G. Woodsong
Background:
The Clean Cars program will fight global warming by requiring automakers to use existing technology to reduce emissions from new cars and light trucks. By adopting the program, Oregon will continue its tradition of environmental leadership.
The Governor has pledged his support, and his Department of Environmental Quality has put forward a formal proposal to adopt the Clean Cars program. Oregon's Environmental Quality Commission will vote on the program on December 22.
But the auto industry is pulling out all the stops, including suing Oregon, to prevent the state from adopting the Clean Cars program. The auto industry lawsuit is likely to fail, but industry lobbyists have said that they "will use every arrow in our quiver to try to stop Oregon from adopting standards we disagree with."
While some in the auto industry opposes this effective program to clean up global warming pollution from cars and light trucks, Oregonians across the state support it. In just the last couple of months, more than 4,000 people have put their names on thank-you cards to the Governor, over 1,200 people sent in comments to the governor's task force on clean cars in support of the program, and over 3,000 people sent emails to auto dealerships and held rallies around Oregon urging dealerships to drop the lawsuit and instead support clean cars.
The December 22nd vote by the Environmental Quality Commission on rules proposed by Gov. Kulongoski's Department of Environmental Quality for the adoption of the Clean Cars program in Oregon is fast approaching.
Wednesday, December 07, 2005
A New Vision for American Development
THE BEST NEW IDEA SINCE SLICED BREAD
...is the title of a contest being held by the SEIU, in an attempt to engage the citizenry in a national dialogue about how to rebuild the competitiveness of this country.
I've submitted an entry, which can be found at:
http://www.sinceslicedbread.com/idea/15115
Other people have submitted ideas like teaching peace, not war, to the nation's children. This is a great idea. But what about all those people who drive around... with peace sign stickers on their bumpers? That is, consuming oil that has a good chance of coming from a foreign country where we go fight wars to ensure our access to the oil, all the while claiming that the solution is to embrace peace, not war.
Another idea is to use mass drivers to shoot our nuclear waste into space in sealed cartridges, presumably en route to the sun. I'm not sure this is such a good idea -- except that the mass driver might turn out to be the best way to get *anything* into space, except perhaps humans, depending on how the g-forces are calibrated for lift-off.
However, what about the country below? I would say that we need to rebuild the national public transportation system to include high-speed rail connecting the major regions, with fast, efficient, high-quality transit connecting all population centers of 1,000 people or more. New development of homes and jobs needs to be concentrated around this network, and business incubation/workforce training centers distributed near most of the hubs (stations) on the system. The idea is that most Americans who live in towns or cities would be able to walk/bike to the corner store and the transit station, and some of them even to work.
Job training centers could include union co-ops, which would make great additions to communities where jobs and housing are clustered around stations that act as hubs on an upgraded national public transportation system, one that is high-quality, high-speed, efficient and accessible to most Americans living in towns of 1,000 or more people.
Peace is just part of the picture. We can only have peace once we no longer have the internal demand within our country for oil that is externally produced. I think the big picture is to rebuild our national infrastructure so that jobs and housing can be concentrated mostly within walking distance of an upgraded national high-speed, high-quality public transportation system.
Development of homes and jobs should be concentrated around this upgraded national public transportation system, so that people can easily walk/bike from home to work to the corner store to the pub... without needing their cars. Also, workforce development and business incubation centers should be located near the hubs on this system, to further help kick-start the local economies.
We can find new transportation technologies, or use existing ones, but integrate them into a comprehensive national system, around which most new development of jobs and housing must be concentrated. I'm talking about a fast (high-speed in most cases), high-quality, efficient public transportation system that serves most towns and cities over 1,000 people in population. It would be built by union labor, but the Transit Oreinted Developments around it would incubate business and train workers for both union and non-union positions (it's hard to unionize people that work for themselves or in an extremely small/start-up business). I call this the new vision for American development, and it's expanded here:
http://www.sinceslicedbread.com/idea/15115
What do you think?
cheers,
~Garlynn
...is the title of a contest being held by the SEIU, in an attempt to engage the citizenry in a national dialogue about how to rebuild the competitiveness of this country.
I've submitted an entry, which can be found at:
http://www.sinceslicedbread.com/idea/15115
Other people have submitted ideas like teaching peace, not war, to the nation's children. This is a great idea. But what about all those people who drive around... with peace sign stickers on their bumpers? That is, consuming oil that has a good chance of coming from a foreign country where we go fight wars to ensure our access to the oil, all the while claiming that the solution is to embrace peace, not war.
Another idea is to use mass drivers to shoot our nuclear waste into space in sealed cartridges, presumably en route to the sun. I'm not sure this is such a good idea -- except that the mass driver might turn out to be the best way to get *anything* into space, except perhaps humans, depending on how the g-forces are calibrated for lift-off.
However, what about the country below? I would say that we need to rebuild the national public transportation system to include high-speed rail connecting the major regions, with fast, efficient, high-quality transit connecting all population centers of 1,000 people or more. New development of homes and jobs needs to be concentrated around this network, and business incubation/workforce training centers distributed near most of the hubs (stations) on the system. The idea is that most Americans who live in towns or cities would be able to walk/bike to the corner store and the transit station, and some of them even to work.
Job training centers could include union co-ops, which would make great additions to communities where jobs and housing are clustered around stations that act as hubs on an upgraded national public transportation system, one that is high-quality, high-speed, efficient and accessible to most Americans living in towns of 1,000 or more people.
Peace is just part of the picture. We can only have peace once we no longer have the internal demand within our country for oil that is externally produced. I think the big picture is to rebuild our national infrastructure so that jobs and housing can be concentrated mostly within walking distance of an upgraded national high-speed, high-quality public transportation system.
Development of homes and jobs should be concentrated around this upgraded national public transportation system, so that people can easily walk/bike from home to work to the corner store to the pub... without needing their cars. Also, workforce development and business incubation centers should be located near the hubs on this system, to further help kick-start the local economies.
We can find new transportation technologies, or use existing ones, but integrate them into a comprehensive national system, around which most new development of jobs and housing must be concentrated. I'm talking about a fast (high-speed in most cases), high-quality, efficient public transportation system that serves most towns and cities over 1,000 people in population. It would be built by union labor, but the Transit Oreinted Developments around it would incubate business and train workers for both union and non-union positions (it's hard to unionize people that work for themselves or in an extremely small/start-up business). I call this the new vision for American development, and it's expanded here:
http://www.sinceslicedbread.com/idea/15115
What do you think?
cheers,
~Garlynn
Monday, November 28, 2005
Portland, OR as hub for open source software
I last wrote about using Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) and passenger rail to revitalize the economy of the state of Oregon. Today, I came across the article below on how the Portland region is shaping up as a hub for the open source community. This only adds to my argument that TOD and passenger rail will be some of the best tools to increase government revenue by breathing life into the economy. If the high tech sector is now turning to open source software as the next engine driving growth within Oregon, then it will need to be tied together with efficient infrastructure. Google's new campus in the Dalles will need to be accessible to Silicon Forest employees in Washington County, to knowledge workers in Central Portland and also to the region's airports. Passenger rail is a good way to make this connection without adding further burden to the state's strained road systems.
Read on for the text of the article, should the link be broken:
Original item: http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1128/p03s02-ussc.html
from the November 28, 2005 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1128/p03s02-ussc.html
Oregon city builds a reputation as a hub for software revolution
Portland is benefiting from the arrival of high-tech companies with an 'open source' philosophy.
By Elizabeth Armstrong Moore | Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor
PORTLAND, ORE. - As a kid in the 1980s, Bart Massey spent hours tinkering with computer programs, writing his own source code and then sharing it with friends. He and his buddies comprised a small band of curious computer whizzes with no agenda, and certainly no rules. Over time, that code-sharing would come to be known as open source: "We just didn't have a name for it then," says Mr. Massey, today a computer science professor at Portland State University.
Too many cooks may spoil the broth, but too many programmers just makes software better. For a multibillion-dollar company that's spent decades protecting its code with the rigor of Fort Knox, that's a radical notion. But open source is fast gaining converts, shattering traditional business models, and, in the process, transforming Portland into one of the world's open source hubs.
Consider the following:
• Companies like IBM, Hewlett-Packard, and Intel have developed their own open-source labs here.
• Linus Torvalds, author of Linux, the first mainstream open-source operating system, moved from the San Francisco Bay Area to work at the Open Source Development Lab in Portland.
• In mid-October the city hosted the first Government Open Source Conference, a gathering for state and municipal technology managers interested in using open-source software in the public sector.
• Most recently, Oregon Gov. Theodore Kulongoski announced a $350,000 contribution from Google to develop open-source software, hardware, and curricula at Oregon State University, which boasts an Open Source Lab, and Portland State University. Portland's standing as a hub for open-source development is not lost on the governor, who is eager to bring even more jobs and investment to what he calls a "burgeoning open technology cluster."
More Firefox than Che
Portland - a city where T-shirts on college campuses are more likely to sport Firefox than Che - is now seeing venture capitalists descending upon it, proof that all the heavyweight open-source talent here may indeed power the local economy.
"I think we'll see a sharp uptick in entrepreneurial activities because of Portland's global influence," says Lavonne Reimer, executive director of the Open Technology Business Center in Beaverton, a suburb.
On the surface it seems odd that the very companies who build and sell their own proprietary software would welcome the arrival of free, open-source rivals. When IBM built its Linux Technology Lab, many observers were left scratching their heads.
But by using open-source systems like Linux, companies can eliminate the cost of building and maintaining their own operating systems, Ms. Reimer says. That leaves them free to focus on other products and services - such as chips or hardware - that are more important to their futures.
From telecommunications to petroleum to government, most industries are choosing Linux over proprietary operating systems because it cuts costs and offers superior security and flexibility, says John Charlson, spokesman at IBM, whose Linux center in Beaverton employs hundreds of programmers. (The more people with access to the system, ironically, the fewer the problems because it is so heavily scrutinized and monitored.)
"Today if you look at the business model, it's relatively stagnant," says Richard Warren, vice president of IBM's Systems and Technology Group in Beaverton. "We're stealing markets from each other, so by creating a new computer paradigm you open the marketplace up." Entire countries - Brazil, China, France, and Australia - are turning to Linux, which has the ultimate effect of expanding the overall number of computer users.
Seen more broadly, the open-source spirit is proving viable as a means of developing many kinds of intellectual property. The popular online encyclopedia Wikipedia, for one, hands over all writing and editing rights to the end user - anyone can post anything - and boasts upward of 1 million entries, each typically informed by several perspectives. News media, for another, are toying with opportunities provided by citizen journalism, where power is handed over to the masses to report on and discuss the news of the day. Even musicians like David Bowie have given away their music to encourage deejays to make mixes.
'There's something new here'
In all of this, one underlying theory is at play: The wider the ownership is spread, the greater the contribution from those "owners" and the better the product.
"Large corporations are realizing that there's method in this madness. Their interests are at a different scale than individuals, but it's kind of the same thing: They want something, and they can't really afford to get it unless they work together," says Ward Cunningham of the Eclipse Foundation, a nonprofit project aimed at developing universal tool sets, and the inventor of the wiki, the software Wikipedia uses. "There's something new here - a cooperation in software, especially software that is clearly valuable."
The open-source revolution has been slow but steady.
"We've grown to have this blind expectation that revolutions will happen on exponential curves - that overnight we'll go from 3 percent acceptance to 70 percent acceptance - and if that doesn't happen it's a failure," Mr. Massey says. "Open source hasn't happened on that curve, but we'll pick up 3 percent for a lot of years to get to 70 percent."
When the software and processes of putting things together is all open source, he predicts, the end user will pay only for the parts with which to put computers together.
"That's a tempting vision," he says.
Read on for the text of the article, should the link be broken:
Original item: http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1128/p03s02-ussc.html
from the November 28, 2005 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1128/p03s02-ussc.html
Oregon city builds a reputation as a hub for software revolution
Portland is benefiting from the arrival of high-tech companies with an 'open source' philosophy.
By Elizabeth Armstrong Moore | Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor
PORTLAND, ORE. - As a kid in the 1980s, Bart Massey spent hours tinkering with computer programs, writing his own source code and then sharing it with friends. He and his buddies comprised a small band of curious computer whizzes with no agenda, and certainly no rules. Over time, that code-sharing would come to be known as open source: "We just didn't have a name for it then," says Mr. Massey, today a computer science professor at Portland State University.
Too many cooks may spoil the broth, but too many programmers just makes software better. For a multibillion-dollar company that's spent decades protecting its code with the rigor of Fort Knox, that's a radical notion. But open source is fast gaining converts, shattering traditional business models, and, in the process, transforming Portland into one of the world's open source hubs.
Consider the following:
• Companies like IBM, Hewlett-Packard, and Intel have developed their own open-source labs here.
• Linus Torvalds, author of Linux, the first mainstream open-source operating system, moved from the San Francisco Bay Area to work at the Open Source Development Lab in Portland.
• In mid-October the city hosted the first Government Open Source Conference, a gathering for state and municipal technology managers interested in using open-source software in the public sector.
• Most recently, Oregon Gov. Theodore Kulongoski announced a $350,000 contribution from Google to develop open-source software, hardware, and curricula at Oregon State University, which boasts an Open Source Lab, and Portland State University. Portland's standing as a hub for open-source development is not lost on the governor, who is eager to bring even more jobs and investment to what he calls a "burgeoning open technology cluster."
More Firefox than Che
Portland - a city where T-shirts on college campuses are more likely to sport Firefox than Che - is now seeing venture capitalists descending upon it, proof that all the heavyweight open-source talent here may indeed power the local economy.
"I think we'll see a sharp uptick in entrepreneurial activities because of Portland's global influence," says Lavonne Reimer, executive director of the Open Technology Business Center in Beaverton, a suburb.
On the surface it seems odd that the very companies who build and sell their own proprietary software would welcome the arrival of free, open-source rivals. When IBM built its Linux Technology Lab, many observers were left scratching their heads.
But by using open-source systems like Linux, companies can eliminate the cost of building and maintaining their own operating systems, Ms. Reimer says. That leaves them free to focus on other products and services - such as chips or hardware - that are more important to their futures.
From telecommunications to petroleum to government, most industries are choosing Linux over proprietary operating systems because it cuts costs and offers superior security and flexibility, says John Charlson, spokesman at IBM, whose Linux center in Beaverton employs hundreds of programmers. (The more people with access to the system, ironically, the fewer the problems because it is so heavily scrutinized and monitored.)
"Today if you look at the business model, it's relatively stagnant," says Richard Warren, vice president of IBM's Systems and Technology Group in Beaverton. "We're stealing markets from each other, so by creating a new computer paradigm you open the marketplace up." Entire countries - Brazil, China, France, and Australia - are turning to Linux, which has the ultimate effect of expanding the overall number of computer users.
Seen more broadly, the open-source spirit is proving viable as a means of developing many kinds of intellectual property. The popular online encyclopedia Wikipedia, for one, hands over all writing and editing rights to the end user - anyone can post anything - and boasts upward of 1 million entries, each typically informed by several perspectives. News media, for another, are toying with opportunities provided by citizen journalism, where power is handed over to the masses to report on and discuss the news of the day. Even musicians like David Bowie have given away their music to encourage deejays to make mixes.
'There's something new here'
In all of this, one underlying theory is at play: The wider the ownership is spread, the greater the contribution from those "owners" and the better the product.
"Large corporations are realizing that there's method in this madness. Their interests are at a different scale than individuals, but it's kind of the same thing: They want something, and they can't really afford to get it unless they work together," says Ward Cunningham of the Eclipse Foundation, a nonprofit project aimed at developing universal tool sets, and the inventor of the wiki, the software Wikipedia uses. "There's something new here - a cooperation in software, especially software that is clearly valuable."
The open-source revolution has been slow but steady.
"We've grown to have this blind expectation that revolutions will happen on exponential curves - that overnight we'll go from 3 percent acceptance to 70 percent acceptance - and if that doesn't happen it's a failure," Mr. Massey says. "Open source hasn't happened on that curve, but we'll pick up 3 percent for a lot of years to get to 70 percent."
When the software and processes of putting things together is all open source, he predicts, the end user will pay only for the parts with which to put computers together.
"That's a tempting vision," he says.
Monday, November 21, 2005
Options to Improve Oregon's Economy
"So if we adjust the fees down for local (and international) businesses, who's going to pay for the roads? Having low property taxes for poor people and families is also a public benefit. Are we going to give up that benefit? Shouldn't the people causing the impact (those eating the pizza) pay for building the public infrastructure required?"
In most other states, the solution is to levy a sales tax on the business transaction. Part of this tax is to pay for the maintenance and upkeep of the transportation system. In some places, like California, each county has the authority to ask its residents to levy a tax specifically for transportation purposes, which must pass with 2/3 of the vote. Many of these are 1/2 cent sales taxes.
In Oregon, the suggestion of a sales tax is political suicide. Just ask any politician anywhere in the state who has ever seriously attempted to propose such a thing, except those in the City of Ashland. Ashland has gotten away with having a municipal sales tax (or perhaps it's a luxury tax -- same difference, a sales tax generally only applies to a specific set of goods and services, excluding such things as groceries) for many years, and this is one of the reasons that town is so well-kept and generally nice-looking. Go visit Ashland to see what I'm talking about.
Is a sales tax the only option for Oregon or communities within this great state who wish to raise additional revenue to maintain the transportation system and other essential public services? No. However, the other options are limited. The property tax is pretty much maxed out in terms of its revenue-generating potential, due to a series of voter-approved limitations on it. The income tax could perhaps be broadened to raise additional revenue, but with a limited in-state tax base, especially of wealthy income-earners, this route is full of peril. Other income possibilities include public-private partnerships and options of limited geographical scope, such as Local Improvement Districts (LIDs).
The Employer Payroll Tax currently only pays for transit operations. It could perhaps be expanded (that is, increased) to pay for additional transportation services (such as capital improvements to and upkeep of the transportation system). However, this has the potential to make Oregon even less business-friendly.
The last option for raising revenue is to raise the overall size of the economy in such a way that the tax revenue generated exceeds the cost to the public sector of accommodating the additional burden of the resources required to support such an expanded economy. The best way to do this is probably to follow the path called "Smart Growth," which focuses new growth around existing infrastructure, especially transit, in order to maximize the revenue to government from the public resources that already exist. A good example of Smart Growth is all of the development that is taking place (and has taken place) since the opening of the Westside Light Rail Line in 1998 between Hillsboro and downtown Portland. A good example of the opportunities for further development, expansion of the economy and therefore additional revenue for the public sector lies with the remaining under-developed parcels near transit along the Westside Corridor, near the Portland Airport along the Airport MAX corridor, and in the Interstate MAX light rail corridor in N/NE Portland. Building out these three corridors with small business with a high potential for growth should be a top priority for the entire state. Small business incubators, loans for business start-up and business improvements, bridge financing and construction financing for developments, and other such policies probably represent the best "bang for the buck" for the state to revive and expand its economy over the next half-decade.
Longer-term, investments in transportation infrastructure to link the disparate sections of the state more closely together will allow for this model of economic expansion to continue in Oregon, as the state slowly climbs out of its economic hole and builds a solid economic foundation upon which to provide employment for its citizens and revenue for the public sector. The next opportunities for such investment could include:
* A higher-speed rail connection between Astoria and some point to the east, perhaps The Dalles or Pendeleton, via St. Helens, Portland, Troutdale and Hood River. Double-tracked higher-speed passenger and freight rail service in this corridor would allow for more transit-oriented development near stations, goods shipment, and even long-distance commuting. I heard a well-founded report that Google is opening a new campus in The Dalles. If so, those employees would be well-served by a passenger rail connection to downtown Portland, where they could transfer to Westside Light Rail to reach the Silicon Forest. Similarly, a new public university campus in Astoria could spur that city's economy, and with a rail connection into downtown Portland, tie it together with the outside world.
* A commuter rail link between the communities of the Rogue Valley (Ashland, Medford, Central Point and Grants Pass, with a possible northern spur to Eagle Point and Shady Cove) would allow for non-automotive transportation options, as well as bring about the potential for transit-oriented development. This is another region where another institution of higher education would do worlds of good for the economy.
* A high-speed rail link between Portland and Bend could help the Central Oregon High Desert communities expand their economies without clogging the state highway system further.
To fund all of this would require vision and leadership, as well as floating capital bonds to pay for construction. The construction would create jobs, as would the operation. Tax Increment Financing in station area locations could help pay for retiring the debt, as well as potentially help to cover operational costs. An expansion of the Employer Payroll Tax to a statewide basis could also help cover the operational costs.
There are many opportunities for the State of Oregon to exert leadership to turn its economy around and still provide the services that its citizens expect. The sales tax is not the only answer. However, this discussion needs to take place, and the sales tax needs to be on the table as a discussion option, so that everybody can weigh all options and choose the one that best reflects the spirit and desires of the state as a whole. Ultimately, I would guess that Oregonians would choose to remain a sales-tax-free state, but only if some of the other options that I have laid out here are brought to fruition to help maintain the services provided by the public sector.
Friday, November 18, 2005
2005: The Year of the Geographical Revolution
He claims that the Google Earth Community currently has ~250,000 members, and that it is growing by approximately eight new members a minute -- worldwide. To prove this latter point, he went to places as diverse as Beijing, China and Bombay, India to show off just how many placemarks (think bookmarks & hyperlinks rolled into one, given a geographical reference and posted on the Google Earth Community) have been posted in these places. As you zoom in, the placemarks for both places tended to fill the screen, eventually blotting out the rest of the map.... and why? Because there are a lot of people in India. And also a lot of people in China. And the law of percentages means that, even if .001 percent of a lot of people knows how to use a computer, and .00001 percent of those have discovered Google Earth, that still translates into a lot of Google Earth users in these places. And because the current user base represents such an astoundingly small fraction of the total potential user base in these places (or the planet, for that matter), there is (how much can I understate this?) *plenty* of room for growth.
How much growth has already occurred in the mere four (4) months that Google Earth has been in existence?
Mr. Jones showed us some numbers. They're astounding... but not necessarily surprising to anybody who is familiar with both the extent of Google's market share and this product. Let's just put it this way: When you do a web search for "Google Earth" you get x many hits, and when you do a web search for the term "GIS" you only get ~1.3x more hits. For the blogosphere, when you do a search for the term "GIS" you get x many hits, and when you do a search for "Google Earth" you get more like 2x hits. Get it? The buzz about this product is HUGE, and growing more or less exponentially. For a company like Google that offers a more or less free product, buzz = business.
Where is this all leading? Here is one idea:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=2179&part=rss&tag=feed&subj=zdblog
That is, Google is seeking to both lay down the physical worldwide infrastructure to support its services, and offer worldwide services for free to anyone with a computr anywhere on the planet. What services? Information. On anything. Keyed geographically. To anybody.
The possibilities are pretty much endless.
That's why I say that 2005 is the year of the Geographical Revolution. The time is now. The place is here -- this planet Earth, and spearheaded right here in the very same San Francisco Bay Area that I temporarily call my own home (though I must say that, hailing from Portland, Oregon, my ancestral, spiritual and permanent home is still in the great green state to the north of here).
And Google is the company that has drop-kicked this revolution into existence with its good sense to provide a geographical reference point for its products.
Let's just say that Michael T. Jones "gets it," in a major way. Say you want to do a Google Search. You want those results displayed on a map? No problem.
...
You don't have to think too much about the possibilities, because they *are* endless & infinite.
So, finally, let me just finish with a three-legged question:
What is the nexus between these three things?
1. The Geographical Revolution, as embodied by Google Earth, et. al.
2. The fast spread of cheap computing power, as embodied by the $100 laptop announced this week.
3. President Bush's declining opinion polls, and the general state of politics and democracy in the American Republic.
comments welcome.
cheers,
~Garlynn
AUTHOR: <$Garlynn G. Woodsong$>
TITLE:
DATE: <$Nov. 18th, 2005 11:15am$>
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
