This week I will appear in:
http://plasticsnews.com/index.html  (Monday Nov 2, 2009)
and
http://www.goodnewstoronto.ca/ (Tuesday Nov 3, 2009)

9/11 · html · http · Red · toronto · writing · www.goodnewstoronto.ca

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/04/080410153643.htm

This recent study shows reveals that humans do like the birds and bees when they make like the birds and bees.  That is to say, there is tremendous evidence in the animal kingdom of the exchange of sex for resources and vice versa.  Humans, it would seem, not immune to this sort of behaviour despite any influences of class or caste. 

In my study of biology, I attended a class at 8am in the dead of winter broadly titled “Animals”.  The class lacked anything wild despite its title and it was an exercise just to keep my eyes open.  Don’t get me wrong, our Prof was a nice enough guy, it’s just I don’t function at that hour.

One day though our professor Kenneth Davey took a tangent into the mating rituals of the fly family Empidae.  He showed a progression in the evolution of nuptial gifts — the process of exchanging resources for sex — across several members of the family in the following progression.

1) The male mates with the female and is eaten by the female.

2) The male brings a food gift to the female hoping that while she’s eating the gift he can do the deed and escape in a hurry.  They mate, she eats the food he brought her followed by him for dessert. 

3) The male brings a food gift wrapped in a grass wrapping.  While she busily unwraps the grass wrapping, he’s able to ‘wham bam and thank you maam’ before she manages to open the package.  He escapes and she at least is able to enjoy her food.

4) The male brings a package to the female.  As she unwraps it he, as before, completes the deed and escapes.  She finally unwraps the package only to discover that it’s empty.

I have too many comments to offer about this tale, so instead I’ll offer none.  I’d imagine your assessment of this story will be highly dependent on your perspective. 

ale · cent · empidae · evolution · flu · food · food gift · http · Kenneth Davey · king · nuptial gifts · professor · resources · sex

Capturing the voice of the customer is difficult when it comes to web visitors.  They visit, the peruse, they leave.  Wouldn’t it be great if you could allow for your visitors to speak with you in real time?

Now you can.  Simple2Chat.com has added a widget which will allow you to do exactly that. 

http://www.simple2chat.com/embed.php

has instructions on how to generate a widget for your website. 

When a visitor wishes to start a conversation s/he can click on the widget on your website:

Simple2Chat.com Widget

You are notified in a tracking conversation:

Notification in tracking conversation

You can then click on that conversation and speak with your visitor in real time.

Response to Customer

All of this is free, anonymous, and doesn’t require anyone to install any software.

Pretty simple huh?  Shouldn’t everything be this easy?

chat · http · instant chat · Internet · internet chat · king · kwout.com · php · simple2chat · Simple2Chat.com · utility · web · web 2.0 · web presence · web visitors · Web Visitors Capturing · widget · www.simple2chat.com

Being foreclosed on?  No worries if you follow the example of Jerome Daly, a lawyer and political activist of sorts, who successfully had his mortgage declared null and void. 

In order for a mortgage agreement to be legal, the bank must put up legal ‘consideration’.  That’s a fancy lawyer word for ‘money’ or some such other tangible asset.  The Federal Reserve System creates money for lending as bookkeeping entries and as such, the bank fails to provide any real consideration in the contract.  As a result, the whole thing is null and void and you can’t be foreclosed upon. 

Don’t believe me?  Read it for yourself here:

http://www.lawlibrary.state.mn.us/CreditRiver/1968-12-09judgmentanddecree.pdf

This decision has never been overturned and Daly was able to keep his house.

bank · fed · federal reserve · Federal Reserve System · http · ILS · Jerome Daly · lawyer · lawyer and political activist · legal consideration · mortgage · Mortgage Crisis · pdf · Red · Rome · the fed · US Federal Reserve

I found a very useful tool for creating nicely formatted equations. I find MS-Word’s equation editor a little lacking when it comes to some math functions. I came across this site:
http://rogercortesi.com/eqn/index.php
which will allow you to enter a LaTeX equation and it will return the properly formatted equivalent in several convenient formats.

For example if you wanted to enter the equation for the prime twin counting function (the number of prime twins between P(n) and P(n)^2) the LaTeX would be:

\#twins[P(n)\to P(n)^2] =
[\frac{(P(1)-1)*(P(2)-1)*...*(P(n-1)-1)}{2*P(1)*P(2)*...*P(n-1)} *(P(n)^2-P(n))]- n*\log_{10}(n)*0.058652

the output would be:

Many thanks to Roger Cortesi for making this tool available.

9/11 · ale · counting · equation · equation editor · http · king · LaTex · php · prime · prime twin · prime twins · Red · Roger Cortesi · twin prime · typesetting

I recently took in a lecture by Neil Turok of Cambridge University.  The lecture referred to an equation of all known physics to date.  Turok comments that it is currently incomplete but explains millions of experiments with only 18 free variables.

Without further ado, here is the equation:

Here is a link to the lecture:
http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=551&Itemid=568&lecture_id=6462

Cambridge University · cent · equation · http · Neil Turok · php · Red · string theory

I’ve been watching with horror as the US economy is reduced to socialism.  Few are asking how much this will cost.  Those who do ask are getting nonsense answers like 25 billion dollars.  The Savings and Loan crisis of the 90’s took 250 billion dollars to bail out.  This current crisis dwarfs that crisis by orders of magnitudes.  So let’s cut through the bull and look at some math.

The Government is now on the hook for 5 trillion dollars in loans.  The only way they can lose money is if people default on those loans AND the value of the underlying asset (the home) has depreciated since the time the loan was issued.

So let’s say that 3% of people default on their loans.  The government is now on the hook for 150 billion dollars.  The government will now try to sell those foreclosed houses at market value.  Suppose those houses were inflated by a factor of 2 (that is they’ve now lost 1/2 their value).  Now the government sells the foreclosed houses at half the price and they’re on the hook for the left over half.  Thus the cost to the government would be 75 billion dollars.  The formula is thus:

bailoutCost = totalValueMortgages * defaultRate * (1 – (1/inflationFactor))

Now the question is where do we come up with values for things like the defaultRate and inflationFactor? (The totalValueMortgages is given as 5 trillion dollars by the government.)

Google mortgage deliquency rates or mortgage default rates and you’ll find numbers ranging from 2-5,  (I took 3 as an average).  Next to figure out the inflation factor, look at this chart:
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2005/08/21/business/21real.graphic.html
and you’ll see that homes are around 2X inflated in value. 

So given these current numbers, the best case cost would be 75 billion dollars.  If the default rate increases or housing devalues beyond 2X the numbers could of course be much higher.  I welcome any polite criticism and/or suggestions for alterations.

bailout · Case · cialis · Economy · fannie · Fannie Cost · freddie · Google · html · http · inflation · king · mortgage · Red · savings and loan · United States · USD

As I continue my studies of the Economy, I’m continually shocked and horrified to find more evidence of mass corruption.

http://www.gata.org/node/wallstreetjournal

The Gold Anti Trust Action Committee has taken out a full page ad in the Wall Street Journal asking, where is all our Gold?

For readers’ information… how did the gold get into Fort Knox in the first place? In 1933 Roosevelt passed a bill mandating that all citizens hand over their gold at base price. This gold was then melted down and stored in Fort Knox.

The last time a civilization was asked to hand over all its gold, they built a golden calf such that they could return to slavery. This time, there was no Moses to save us from our own stupidity. We don’t tromp in mud pits making bricks, but we do tromp to 9 to 5 jobs each day churning out contributions to our 401 K’s.

Fort Knox has never been officially audited. Moreover, strong rumours exist that the Federal Reserve has procured this gold as collateral against the US national debt. If there is no gold to be found in Fort Knox, perhaps with an open and honest audit, we may again find our liberty.

GATA has a video of a symposium they held. A summary can be found here:
http://www.gata.org/goldrush21

9 to 5 · Economy · fed · federal reserve · Federal Reserve System · fort knox · gold · Gold Anti Trust Action Committee · gold standard · golden calf · http · king · MIT · Red · roosevelt · slavery · the fed · the Wall Street Journal · United States · US Federal Reserve · video · Wall Street Journal

This piece is in the baritone range which is a little easier given my current sinusitis.  I suppose it’s better to crawl before I walk.

http://s21.divshare.com/launch.php?f=7793954&s=c76

http · Innovi Technologies S21 Bluetooth Headset · Martin C. Winer · php · sinusitis

There has been a lot of controversy regarding the proposed integration of ‘Intelligent Design’ into current biology curriculum. Intelligent Design is the hypothesis that all life on Earth was created and designed by an intelligent designer. Subsumed by this hypothesis, although not clearly stated, is that most proponents of Intelligent Design believe the intelligent designer to be the most intelligent designer, namely God. It is proposed that in the name of impartiality, Intelligent Design be taught along side Darwinian Evolution in biology classes.

We have two choices in trying to argue against this hypothesis. First we can show that the hypothesis is false by counter claims of design flaws. Next we can show that the hypothesis is an inherently un-testable hypothesis which thus belongs in the realms of philosophy or theology, but not in science. I will argue that while the first approach of finding design flaws is enlightening, it misses the issue. The issue is that for something to be taught in a science classroom it must somehow relate to a testable hypothesis: testable by experiment.

The temptation for someone who is versed in biology when approached with Intelligent Design is to quickly point out all of the design flaws that they know of. There are many examples to pick from but the most commonly offered are design flaws in (human) joints, most notably the elbow and the knee. One of my personal favourites is the prevalence of people with eye glasses which suggests there is a possible design flaw in the maintenance of a spherical shape of the eye. Biologists quickly offer up their favourite design flaw hoping to see a recantation of Intelligent Design. To their dismay, they get answers like: “We do not know the design of the intelligent designer. Perhaps non-spherical eyes are beneficial in some other unknown way, or the knee was some sort of design trade off against some other more beneficial feature. However, the sum of all the trade offs is the ultimate perfect design, designed by the most intelligent designer, God.” The frustrated scientist then returns to his beaker and the Intelligent Design guru returns to his pulpit or to the White House which are increasingly indistinguishable.

The reason that the hypothetical scientist and the theologian talk at cross purposes is that they both have failed to realize the bar of entry to science: a testable hypothesis. In life there are testable hypotheses and un-testable hypotheses. Some un-testable hypotheses are:
1) In absence of an observer, human or otherwise (i.e. a tape recorder): If a tree falls in a forest, does it make a noise? Yes or no?
2) Suppose all of history started 5 minutes ago with all of our collective memories implanted at that moment.
3) All good in the world is a work of a benevolent God, and all problems people experience are the result of God working in mysterious (good) ways.
More topically:
4) The wonder and beauty of the living world is the result of an intelligent design and all counter examples such as fossils, design flaws, evolutionary proofs, are just the result of our inability to grasp the grand design.

The common thread that runs across all four statements is the fallacy of an unprovable statement. It is this same thread that many stitch together to form a rip stop nylon fabric of belief. Statements 1 through 3 would likely be widely accepted as topics for a class on philosophy or theology. Statement 4 is no different. It is an inherently unprovable statement which has no place in science.

Many have said that science is a religion unto itself. I have often said that the only reason our language has two words for science and religion is that we sorely misunderstand both. They are both searches for the truth. Science is an ideology based on the Scientific Method and the instrument of that method is the experiment. Science allows for discussions of all things provable, even if they are not yet proved. Take for example the Superstring revolution in physics. It is currently unproven; however, scientists are building the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) in Switzerland which should have sufficient power to create ’supersymmetric’ particles which would confirm the theory. What experiment does Intelligent Design proposes to validate its hypothesis? How does one experimentally prove something was designed? Even if such an experiment could be constructed, how then does that disprove that the designed item was not self designed and thus (perhaps), not intelligently designed?

Confused? The notion of a self designing design is especially hard to understand on a planet where we (most) see a clear distinction between human made and natural objects. [However, it is a distinction I do not see because humans as part of nature.] Just the same, the notion of a self designing design is crucial to evolution, and while complex, its power is compelling. If you are confused and interested pick up a good book on the subject or take a course. However, if you are presented with Intelligent Design, ask for a proposed or executed experiment published in a reputable scientific journal. Darwin had to go through the same efforts of the before his works were accepted. There is an established process in place and it has been put in place by an intelligent design (irony intended). The designer is certainly not God and its intelligence is often arguable, just the same it has served us well so far.

In summation, scientists are, by definition, very inquisitive people who would love to have conversations about many different theories and possibilities. The price of admission to such a conversation is to bring with an experimentally testable hypothesis. All other discussions belong in a different classroom.

AID · ale · creationism · darwin · darwinism · designer · evolution · frustrated scientist · God · http · hypothetical scientist · ILS · intelligent design · intelligent designer · king · life · namely God · nature · observer · philosophy · Red · Religion · Switzerland · White House

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-515319560256183936&q=the+money+masters&total=630&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

Normally any discussion of the economy or finance causes my eyes to glaze over. However, I chanced upon this documentary and started to watch it. Shortly thereafter, I was glued to it. I finally understand questions I’ve had for a long time.

1) How do they know how much money to print?

2) What causes recessions/depressions?

In addition I learned a lot more about the corruption inherent in our financial system. Well worth the 3.5 hours this documentary runs for. Just one question: what is with this guy and his pen?

Economy · federal reserve · finance · gold standard · Google · http · video

I typically shy away from watching American Idol. I find watching peoples hopes dashed by ‘judges’ akin to watching humans flayed by gladiators to the amusement of the dullard populace. Parenthetically, I wonder how the objectively questionable voices of legends: Louis Armstrong, Neil Young, Bob Dylan or Robert Plant would survive the scrutiny of the bastions of talent assessment found in judges: Simon Cowell, Randy Jackson, and Paula Abdul. Paula Abdul. My automatic grammar checker is telling me that the sentence “Paula Abdul.” on its own is a sentence fragment; I couldn’t disagree with it more in this context. In fact, I find it to be a full paragraph.While I find the show irksome, mustering the power to ‘turn the other cheek’ is about as hard as turning to another channel and as such, I haven’t, until recently, paid it much mind. However, when this show chose to wax moral, I perked up my ears because when a Fox Network program discusses morals, this is bound to be something I want to tune into. (Words fail to express the sarcasm of the previous sentence.) The Fox Network is the same network which brought you the tasteful tidbit “Who Wants to Marry a Millionaire?” and is the official station of George W. Bush and his war to eradicate weapons of mass destruction. (In a strange twist of fate, the largest [and only] weapon of mass destruction after the year 2000 in Iraq turned out to be George W. Bush himself.) This is the network that sought to sanction contestant Antonella Barba on American Idol after it was revealed she had some scandalous photographs found on the internet. Barba was voted off the show, but it was her voice that was cited as the final cause. Nonetheless, American Idol has previously removed a contestant “Frenchie” after pictures surfaced of her on an adult pay site.

A Google search of either girl will reveal an onslaught of the related pictures as well as 50 pop up adds suggesting you need a larger penis, methods for fixing the problem and several contests you’ve won which should provide funds for any such programs. After closing the fog of pop ups, the pictures that emerged were at best Maxim or FHM worthy. To those not versed in the realm, Maxim and FHM are to Playboy and Penthouse as light-filtered-cigarettes are to cigars. My initial reaction to the pictures was flaccid causing me to momentarily rethink closing all the previous pop ups. After that moment I realized that I was unimpressed because it was clear to me that these pictures had absolutely nothing to do with the talent of the contestants. For the record, Frenchie has moved on to a promising career on Broadway. Instead, these pictures had everything to do with our confused morals.

Some will immediately protest: “the show is called American IDOL” — emphasis on ‘idol’ — and hence part of the criteria must be if such people are worthy of being idols. As soon as we open this can of worms, it’s necessary for American Idol to somehow consider the morals of the contestants. Morals and ethics are complicated and I’m certain that the Fox Network lacks the acumen to address the issue. In fact, I find it very hard to determine if it was revealed that Barba mutilated puppies would it have received more or less press and attention? I hear the conservative drone say: “the children, the poor children, whatever will we do if they see those pictures?!” To such parents, I point out that what would happen to children if children watch the evening news? I will attend that point momentarily.

Only in such a state of moral asymmetry could we even begin to ask these sorts of questions. Let’s look at the issue. Pornography: bad, good, neither, both? Dr Phil’s ‘Occam’s Razor’ style argument on the topic goes like this: If you wouldn’t want your daughter involved in porn, then why would you watch someone elses’ daughter? Dr Phil, President Bush and the Fox Network are experts at providing short answers to complicated questions that sound reasonable and under scrutiny turn out to be faulty. At the risk of being guilty of the same thing I accuse Dr. Phil, the short answer to Dr. Phil is: I don’t want my daughter to be a sanitation maintenance engineer (the politically correct term for garbage man/woman) but that doesn’t stop me from taking my trash to the curb. However, let’s take a deeper look at the issue, and to do so, we’ll restrict the general porn issue to examining going topless at a beach. If anyone reading the rest of this article derives that I carte blanche advocate pornography, I invite them to reread the previous sentence.

(An unremembered comedian [likely Bill Maher or Robin Williams] once quipped that to, the overly simplified criminal justice mantra, “three strikes and you’re out” is the answer to gays in the military “four balls and you walk”?)

I’d like to ask Dr. Phil if he’d let his daughter go topless on a beach. I suspect strongly that he’d say no. Then I’d like to ask him if he’d let his daughter go topless on a beach in Brazil where the practice is commonplace (certainly more common place) and considered about as common as walking around in a bikini. I suspect he’d still say no, but the question would have got him thinking (and hopefully you as well). People will hem and haw over this point but that’s only because we’re dealing with the cusp of what’s currently considered ‘ok’. Then I’d ask him if he’d let his daughter wear one piece swim suit (not a bikini). I suspect he’d say yes. Then I’d finally ask him, if he lived in the 1800’s (when woman swam in the equivalent of a ‘Burka’) would he also let her wear a one piece swim suit? I’d like very much to hear his answer. Whether he says yes or no, he’d be forced to admit that his ‘morals’ have more to do with the time (society) he lives in than what is actually ‘right or wrong’. Star Wars got it right when George Bush gawks: “You’re either with us or against us” and Obe Wan Kenobi replies: “only the Sith believe in absolutes.” It’s my personal belief that the ‘Sith’ is a code for George Bush and the conservative lot (Sith = Simple Ignorant THeists).

Thus, questions of moral propriety are very hard questions to answer, and I sure as hell don’t want the Fox Network to even make the attempt. The question of where this moral confusion arose in the first place begs answering. I can only offer an answer in a form of an allegory of two presidents. First we have a story of an otherwise good president who had sex in the oval office; He was impeached. Next we have a story of a president who didn’t have sex in the oval office and sent a nation to war to get rid of weapons of mass destruction which didn’t exist. This president who sent thousands to their deaths for no reason at all was, was… was… Oh, nothing happened to him.

The take home message of all this confusion is that morals are hard. You’re going to have to turn off the TV and think about them if you want to have a chance of getting them right. In turn, the only take home message one can glean about the state of American morals from all this is that Americans are fine with boobs only so long as one doesn’t post pictures of them on the internet and instead elects them to office.

advocate · AID · ale · America · american idol · antonella barba · Bill Maher · bob dylan · Brazil · bush · cent · ethics · Fox Network · George · george bush · George W. Bush · Google · http · Internet · Iraq · king · Louis Armstrong · MIT · morals · Neil Young · otherwise good president · Paula Abdul · Phil's 'Occam · President · RAM · Randy Jackson · Red · Robert Plant · Robin Williams · sanitation maintenance engineer · sex · Simon Cowell · star wars · station of George W. Bush · unremembered comedian

“Only puny secrets need protection. Big discoveries are protected by public incredulity.”   – Marshall McLuhan

(From  “Take Today: The Executive as Dropout (1972)”, page 92.)

Executive · head · http · Marshall McLuhan · public incredulity · quote · Red · secrets

A Crypto Star of David in Yata, Palestinian Territories

A report by Nissim Mossek about Palestinians of Jewish origin.

Video:  http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-279707#

Time Index / Note

1:10 – Many Palestinians are crypto-Jews from the era of Bar Kochba
1:50 – As many as 85% of Palestinians are of Jewish origin
3:55 – The Sawarka Tribe (located deep in the Palestinian Territories), admits Jewish origins, didn’t light fires on Sabbath, had mikvehs (ritual immersion)
5:00 Hebrew University genetic study reveals Jews and Palestinians descended commonly from Babylonian Kurds
6:10, Some Palestinians have the ‘Cohen gene’
7:00 The Sawarka boys are circumcised after the 7th day which is unlike the Moslem tradition.
7:25 The Sawarka brother of a deceased man is obligated to offer himself as a groom to the widow, according to biblical tradition.  (Tradition of Yibbum, Deut 25:5)
7:55 As recently as 200 years ago the village of Sachnin had an active synagogue
9:20 The Makhamra clan are open about their Jewish origins.  Makhamra means:  Wine Makers, Heaven have mercy Upon us  (wine is stricly forbidden in Islam).
10:20 90% of the Village of Yata is originally Jewish
10:35 Mezuza and Tefillin hidden in houses of Yata.
11:35 Bar Kochba, according to an Israeli settler was originally named: Ben Kuziba

ale · Babylonian Kurds · Bar Kochba · Ben Kuziba · cent · Hebrew University · http · Israel · Jews · Makhamra · MIT · Nissim Mossek · Sachnin · Sawarka · video · Yata · Yibbum

The Past:

In the web 1.0 world, we were happy just to be able to surf the web and have access to thousands of new and wonderful services.  However, shortly thereafter, our hard drives became bloated with installed components, some of which were seldom used, slowing our operating systems to a crawl.  Around the same time, surfing the web became a game of ‘memory’ where we had to guess which user names and passwords we had created to get at all these great services.  If we had the misfortune of guessing incorrectly more than 3 times, we often ran into a situation where accounts became locked, requiring emails to virtually nonexistent customer service departments.  In web 1.0 our surfing was limited by our ability to remember passwords and our OS’s ability to support multiple plug ins and installed software components.

Web 2.0 — The Present:

With the advent of Web 2.0 we’re witnessing a new movement, that of the no cost,  no install, and no log in software.  Tired of installing software and creating user accounts, sites have popped up which offer much of the functionality we’re used to with less of the hassle.

Photo Sharing:

Yes Flickr is great.  But what if you want to simply post a fast picture without having to log in and create a sign on?  I just want to quickly share a picture.  I’ve tried these two sites:

Share4Pic -> http://share4pic.com/en/
Image Ox -> http://www.imageox.com/

For example, using Share4Pic to share the image associated with this post:  I need only simply visit the site and perform a quick upload.  After that I’m immediately given a url (link) which I can use in a chat or in an email or what have you.

http://share4pic.com/images/5/8/1/5811518.jpg

Screenshot Sharing

You can adapt this idea to allow for screen shot sharing.  Suppose you are helping someone having some problems using a program.  You’d like to send them a picture of the screen in front of you with some comments.  No problem, just press ALT+PRINT SCREEN.  Now, on Windows, under accessories, open “Paint”.  Using the “Edit” menu click on “Paste” and your screen shot will now appear.  Use the text tool to enter comments as necessary.  Save the file as type “JPG” (jpeg) and save it with a name you’ll remember in a location you’ll remember.  Now, just upload this file to a photo sharing site like share4pic or imageox and send the link to your suffering friend.  He or she will now be able to view your screenshot and benefit from the advice you’ve added.  An example is here:

http://share4pic.com/en/6541394/How_to_share_images/

Screenshot Kwouting (Quoting)

Another great util for sharing screenshots or part of a screen is www.kwout.com .  Have you ever just wanted to show someone where to click or what to look for on a web page?  The best way to do so is to simply show them a picture of what you’re talking about.  They’ve provided a handy widget such that web designers can embed their functionality into their own site.  If you click on this button:

you can ‘kwout’ an excerpt from this blog entry!  As an example from www.simple2chat.com, if I wanted to show someone how to start a new conversation, I could tell them to click on the new conversation button in the tool bar  .  As they say “a picture is worth a thousand words”.  Hopefully this utility will save you several thousand words.  Again, no login, and no install required.  (There is also a handy Firefox plugin which isn’t necessary but is very helpful to have.)

Online Office:

Microsoft Office is great.  It’s been great since 1995 after which I can’t understand the justification for any upgrades.  The problem with Microsoft Office is 1) its cost and 2) it takes up space and resources on your machine.  Web 2.0 has seen the introduction of online office suites.  Three come to mind right of the top of my head:
Think Free: http://member.thinkfree.com/
Zoho: http://www.zoho.com/
Google Docs:  http://docs.google.com

Now, admittedly all these sites require a log in, but they don’t require any installation.  The log in is required to keep track of your documents.  These online suites are, in my opinion, better than Microsoft office as they allow for collaboration across many platforms and sites.  You can build a slide show with your colleagues across the world while working on the final numbers on a spreadsheet type application.

There is another suite here worth mentioning and that’s Open Office.  It doesn’t require a log in, but does require an install.  Just the same, it’s a full featured office suite that is free of charge and is very robust in the features offered.

Music:

The recording industry and the internet community have been playing a game of cat and mouse over the past decade.  There are so many file sharing programs that have been made available and then prosectued that I’ve almost lost track.  To name a few, Kazaa, Bear Share, EMule, Limewire, and all the torrent sites no less.  All are/were great ways to get plenty of mp3’s illegally.  Then came along ITunes and several other pay sites which had a terrific library which you could access by proprietary installed software.

What if you could listen to all the music you wanted without the legal entanglements?  Sounds too good to be true?  Well, not in the world of Web 2.0.  I came across this gem in my internet travels:
http://songza.com/

It’s 100% legal (all artists are payed) and it’s provided to you with no log in and at no cost.  I was amazed with the coverage their library offered.  I tested the depth of coverage with a few rare or rarer favorites of mine from various eras such as:

Saint Saens “Danse Macabre”: http://songza.com/z/gg09tj
T-Bone Walker  “Stormy Monday” : http://songza.com/z/yg36z3
Herbert Gorecki  “Symphony No 3″: http://songza.com/z/af287q
Billie Holiday  ”I Wished On The Moon”: http://songza.com/z/qh8i8y
Pink Floyd “Corporal Clegg”: http://songza.com/z/umf8nj
John Foxx “Underpass”: http://songza.com/z/yo3705
Lenny Kravitz “The Resurrection”: http://songza.com/z/yyv2w6

Music Sharing

If you are an artist yourself and wish to share your music there is a site I recommend which does require a login, but no installation:  www.odeo.com On it, you can create channels of your own works and share them with your friends and colleagues.  Here is a channel created by yours truly:
http://odeo.com/channel/120616/view

Chat:

Internet chat is at once the greatest productivity booster and impedement of the modern era.  I have four different chat clients running on my machine (msn,yahoo,googletalk, and skype).  There are programs such as Trillian which seek to consolidate these services under one umbrella.  First off, it requires an installation and second, I find it doesn’t do a great job at completeness (eg file sharing and video often disabled).

Web 2.0 has a few partial solutions to the chat client overpopulation problem.  The first is www.meebo.com.  This is a site, which like Trillian, puts all your chat accounts under one umbrella.  It has a Firefox plugin which will allow you to use it as though it has been installed on your computer.  It won’t support video or several other advanced features of any given chat program, but at least you don’t need to install anything.

If you’d simply like to have a chat conversation with a few people without having to have them all on the same chat protocol, you can use www.simple2chat.com which is provided by yours truly.  This isn’t intended to be a replacement for chat, but is instead a no login, no install, simple, and fast chat site to allow people to converse or conference quickly and easily.

File Sharing / File BackUp:

With web 2.0, we won’t be installing as much software as we used to.  However, what do we do with all the files we have?  A good example that comes to mind is my mp3 collection.  When I’m at work, how do I have access to my mp3 collection?  I could take a USB memory key, but wouldn’t it be great if there was a web accessible service which could store reams of data?  Well there is.  www.adrive.com offers 50GB (!!) of storage.  You can share the files you’ve stored and upload and download files from any computer with internet access.  You have to provide a login, but that’s no big deal given the advantages.

If you’d like a quick file sharing utility, try www.drop.io .  This utility allows you to share files plus a whole host of other great features.

Summary:

Web 2.0 is a brave new world wide web.  There is no longer the need to install software for hours on end.  Your data, songs, pictures, work documents, and chat clients can now follow you wherever you go.

Websites Mentioned:

Photo Sharing
http://share4pic.com/en/

http://www.imageox.com/

Screenshot Quoting
www.kwout.com
Online Office
http://member.thinkfree.com/
http://www.zoho.com/
http://docs.google.com
Free Downloadable Office Suite
Open Office
Music (Listening)
http://songza.com/
Music (Sharing)
www.odeo.com
Chat – Download – All In One
Trillian
Chat – Online – No Install – All In One
www.meebo.com
Chat Online Instant Chat / Conference – No Install, No Login
www.simple2chat.com
File Sharing
www.adrive.com
www.drop.io

Digg This Story!

adrive · artist · blog · cent · chat · conference · designer · drop.io · file sharing · firefox · flickr · Google · google docs · head · http · ILS · imageox · instant chat · Internet · internet chat · itunes · king · kwout.com · location · meebo · microsoft office · MIT · mp3 · Music · music sharing · odeo · online backup · online chat · online office · open office · operating system · overpopulation · photo sharing · RAM · Red · resources · screenshot · screenshot sharing · share4pic · simple2chat · songza · think free · utility · video · web · web 2.0 · widget · world wide web · www.simple2chat.com · zoho · zoho office

This is by far the best World War II essay I’ve ever read. 

http://leesandlin.com/articles/LosingTheWar.htm

http · WWII

This is a great bit of comedy.  It’s been a while since I heard it. 

fda · Google · http · player · Red · video

This is one of my favourite Neapolitan love songs.   It is mournful during descriptions of the present and joyous and hopeful in recollections of the past.  I’ve been trying for some time to find a translation.  I’ve found a partial translation from the version performed by Mario Lanza (which was abridged).  I prefer the rendition of Claudio Villa presented here:

Here is the partial translation.  If anyone has a more complete translation, please provide a link in the comments.

Si ’sta voce te sceta ‘int’a nuttata,
If this voice wakes you in the night
Mentre t’astringe ‘o sposo tuio vicino,
While the man at your side is holding you
Statte scetata, si vuo sta scetata,
Stay awake if you want to stay awake
Ma fa vede ca duorme a suonno chino.
But pretend that you’re fast asleep.

Nun gghi vicino’e llastre pe’ ffa’ spia,
Don’t go to the window to see who’s there
Pecche nun puo sbaglia: ‘sta voce e’e mia…
Because you can’t mistake it – that voice is mine…
E’a stessa voce ‘e quanno tutt’e dduie
The same voice as when we both
Scurnuse, nce parlavamo c’o "vvuie".
Were strangers, both so formal.

Si ’sta voce, che chiagn’int’ `a nuttata
If this voice crying into the night
Te sceta’o sposo, nun ave paura,
Wakes your man, don’t be afraid
Vide ch’e senza nomme’a sserenata…
Because there are no names in my serenade…
Dille ca dorme e ca se rassicura…
Tell him to sleep, that everything’s all right.

Dille accussi: "Chi canta ‘inta ‘sta via
Tell him: "Whoever is singing down in the street
O sarra pazzo o more’e ggelusia
Is either crazy or dying of jealousy
Starra chiagneno quacce `nfamita
He’s probably crying over some betrayal,
Canta isso sulo. Ma che canta a ffa?"
He sings alone. But what’s he singing for?”

AID · Claudio Villa · http · Mario Lanza · MIT · RAM · Red

Ray Charles has been featured on the Cosby show several times.  Most commonly people remember the Cosby children performing a lip sync rendition of “Night Time is the Right Time” in honour of the Huxtable Grandparents’ anniversary.

Evidently this audio was only ever commercially released on an out of print record by Golden Music: “Sing: Songs of Joe Raposo”.

Cosby · Cosby Show · gold · Golden Music · http · Joe Raposo · Music · player · RAM · Ray Charles · Red · Rome · the Huxtable Grandparents' anniversary

For years now, I’ve tried to understand how the Federal Reserve (the Fed) lowers interest rates and how it affects inflation. I mistakenly thought that the Federal Reserve was a wholesaler of money. I thought that it was a Federal institution which under the direction of the government could make money available to banks at a certain lending rate. Thus when the Fed lowered rates to say 3%, the banks could get money at that rate and pass the savings along to their customers by lending money at say 3.5%. I was partially mistaken in my interpretation as to how that affected interest rates. I thought that as a result of people being able to get money at a lower rate, people would spend more, and the more they spent, the more the market could tolerate higher prices for common goods. This is true, but isn’t the full story. So let’s get the full picture.

My first mistake occurred when I assumed the Federal Reserve was a federal institution of any sort. This is not at all true. It is a private bank enacted by an act of congress in 1913 to oversee the US monetary policy. I offer the following interesting nugget of information for those who are interested: It was passed on Dec 23 1913 when most of congress was on vacation, in absence of a proper quorum. If that tidbit piqued your interest, please see this post: http://mwiner.wordpress.com/2008/01/25/terrific-documentary-explaining-the-economy/

So how then does the Fed manage to control interest rates? First off, when you hear of the Fed lowering or raising the interest rate, it isn’t directly lowering or raising the interest rates, it is changing the target interest rate. At a high level, the Fed accomplishes this by controlling the supply of money. Money, just like any other commodity can respond to supply and demand. If there is a lot of money in the economy, interest rates will drop because banks will have an easier time of procuring money to loan. However, having more money in the economy encourages inflation because the value of the currency is lowered by increased supply.

If you want to understand how the Fed manages to expand or contract the supply of money, we need to first understand a few key concepts. The first is partial reserve banking. It was long ago that banks discovered that not every person needed their cash at any given time. It was thus that banks could loan money that technically they didn’t have on reserve. In the US, banks are required to maintain a 10% reserve which means they can loan out 10 times the amount they have on reserve. (This is often referred to as ‘banker’s reach’.)

Next you need to understand what a treasury bill is. A treasury bill is a promise issued to the buyer by the federal government to give you the maturation price of the bill on the maturation date. The bill is always sold at a discount rate, that is a rate, less than the maturation date. For example, a treasury bill may be sold at a discount rate of $950, a maturity rate of $1000 and a maturity date which is a year from now. This means you can buy the bill at $950 and make $50 dollars profit when it matures in a year.

So we now have enough knowledge to work a simple example of how the system works. Suppose that the interest rate is currently 8%. Suppose too that there are 100 people who have $10 each. These 100 people each put $2 in the bank. The bank thus has $200 in reserves and due to partial reserve banking, they can make ten times that amount, some $2,000 in loans. This means they can make a loan of $20 per person.

People typically want to buy things that are 4 times the amount they have on hand. In housing the standard financing model is you must have 1/4 the purchase price in capital. So people with $10 typically want to make a major life purchase which would be $40, but as we see, the bank can easily lend everyone $20, but $40 would be hard to come by at a reasonable interest rate. Thus, people stop purchasing, the economy stalls and the Fed decides to step in.

The Fed does some research and discovers that if the lending rate reduces to 5%, then most people will be able to make the payments and will take out loans and start spending again. So the Fed set the TARGET rate to 5%. To reach this level, the Fed offers to buy a treasury bill the bank has on hand with a maturity value of $500. The bank accepts and now the bank has $700 in reserves. Recall that the bank is allowed to loan out 10 times the amount it has on reserve. So the bank can make $7000 dollars in loans or $70 dollars per person. Since the amount to loan out is plentiful the bank lowers its lending rate to 5% to entice people to take out loans.

It’s important to keep track of the total amount of money in the economy while all this occurs. We started with 100 people having $10 each. Thus there was $1000 in the economy. When the Fed purchased the treasury bill, it printed money to do so. So now there is another $500 dollars in the economy for a total of $1500. You may be scratching your head over the previous sentence, but this is the second part of the misnomer “Federal Reserve”. The Federal reserve is not federal and it doesn’t have any reserves. It prints money to make purchases. I don’t want this post to become a rant against the Fed so I’ll cut it short here and explain the other side of the coin: how the Fed contracts the supply of money.

So now in our moot world, everyone can take out a $30 loan to get the $40 item they’ve been dreaming of. However, one of the principles of a free market is that prices will rise to the maximum that the market will bear. As a result, since most people can afford the $40 item, the market starts charging $42 or $44. Slowly the price creeps up because the value of money has been decreased by an increased supply. In short we are experiencing inflation.

So the Fed sees this situation and decides to curb inflation by raising the target interest rate. By raising the target interest rate, the Fed makes money harder to get, more scarce and thus the market can’t bear higher prices, slowing spending and curbing inflation. To accomplish this, the Fed sells treasury bills. By selling treasury bills, banks that purchase them are forced to spend their reserves to make the purchase, thus pulling cash out of the economy. Recall that banks can loan 10 times the amount they have on reserve. By lowering the amount of cash banks have on reserve, the Fed restricts the bank’s ability to make loans. Since the bank has less money to loan, it must charge more interest to compensate, and the interest rates rise. The key point here is that the difference between the discount rate and the maturity rate must be paid for at some future rate. When the bank comes to collect on this treasury bill, the Fed must pay the bank the promised maturity price. If you have an eye for catching trends then you may have already guessed that the money to pay the difference comes from, yup, you guessed it, printed money.

In conclusion, the Fed controls the supply of money. It accomplishes this by buying and selling treasury bills on the common market. It’s important to remember that when the Fed buys treasury bills it does so with printed money. Also when the Fed issues treasury notes and those notes are redeemed, the difference owed to the purchaser is paid with printed money. This is called a fiat currency, or a currency based on credit — in this case the credit of the United States. It doesn’t take a Harvard ecomonist to realize that every time the Fed runs through one of these cycles of inflation and contraction, that the amount of money in the economy is increased. It is only a question of time before the Fed destroys the currency it relies upon by making it too common. This process is called devaluation. If you want to see devaluation in action, see this graph of the US dollar vs. the Euro over the past 5 years:

http://finance.yahoo.com/currency/convert?from=USD&to=EUR&amt=1&t=5y

AID · ale · bank · banker · banking · Case · cash banks · Congress · Economy · fed · federal government · federal reserve · Federal Reserve System · fiat · fiat currency · finance · free market · Harvard · head · http · inflation · interest rate · king · life · monetary policy · partial reserve banking · private bank · Red · reserve banking · the fed · United States · US Federal Reserve · USD · wholesaler