] Incidents of violence, discrimination and harassment
] against Muslims in the United States soared 70 percent in
] 2003 over the previous year, an Islamic civil rights
] group reported on Monday.

[ Can't say this surprises me. Frickin' people. -k]

US Anti-Muslim Incidents Up 70 Pct in 2003 -Report

] The Fraunhofer Institute, originator of the file format
] that brought the music industry to its knees, is adding
] surround sound and copyright protection.

[ Anyone have any more info about this? This is the first I've heard of it. Specifically, I want information about this "Light Weight DRM" of which they speak. I have little doubt that it's just as breakable as every other DRM scheme has been, but I'm curious. I'm also curious how good the psychoacoustic modeling must be do what they claim. I don't have a 5.1 system, and I'm not likely to pay for an encoder, so I don't have a practical need for any of this. Hardly any music is released in 5.1 as it stands... -k]

MP3 Grows Up%u2014But Do We Want It To?

ORLANDO, Florida (AP) -- A federal drug agent shot himself in the leg during a gun safety presentation to children in what police describe as an accident. His bosses, however, are still investigating the incident.

Irony I ro ny
1. Incongruity between what might be expected and what actually occurs: “Hyde noted the irony of Ireland's copying the nation she most hated” (Richard Kain).

2. An occurrence, result, or circumstance notable for such incongruity.

[ HA! -k]

Gun safety presenter shoots self

] Mr. Bush is right to champion free trade and global
] prosperity, since an economically integrated world will
] be a more stable one. And he is right to hope that China
] in particular stays on the free-market path. But if
] China, with its 1.2 billion people, does keep up its
] brisk economic growth, won't the day come when it can
] match America's defense budget without breaking a sweat?
] How can America then afford to keep its military so
] potent as to "dissuade potential adversaries from
] pursuing a military build-up in hopes of surpassing, or
] equaling, the power of the United States"?

this is Robert Wright from Sept. 2002... another quote :

"Yet the Bush administration, with its limited regard for both international law and world opinion, is making America not just sheriff, but judge, jury and executioner. This strategy could lead to a number of outcomes, but national security isn't among the more likely."

Contradictions of a Superpower

Tom Friedman corroborates the latest Stratfor Weekly analysis.

The most striking thing about being in Asia today is hearing how much more important China's growth engine has become for companies all across the region -- and well beyond it.

To some degree the world is getting hooked on China. The more hooked we become, the less the world can tolerate any sort of prolonged instability there. If the China bubble bursts, it will be the mother of all burst bubbles.

If a client owes you $1,000, that's his problem. If a client owes you $1 million, that's your problem. China's stability is our problem.

[ Indeed, Robert Wright makes this point in Nonzero... as we become more interconnected, our fates become tied, and our incentive to find non-zero-sum solutions is increased because their benefit is our benefit. Any impulse to screw the other guy is curbed somewhat by the knowledge that we'd be screwing ourselves.

edit : I memed another relevant Wright article from 9/02 in the NYT, here : http://www.memestreams.net/users/k/blogid4009497

He mentions China in his analysis of the Bush foreign policy/national security plan relaeased about that time.

--
To jump topic a bit, I'm gonna re-recommend that book... as a long time cynic, but global optimist, this book has been massively reassuring, and very compelling. I generally think individuals are often stupid or selfish, but that humans, in total, tend to act in positive ways over enough time. I feel that this book has started explaining why i've had that impression for so many years... get a copy if you're into such things... -k]

Let Us Pray

] Only now do I realise that while I have been downloading
] songs, I have been unloading my dignity, a song at a
] time. Years of buying music-snob CDs have given way to an
] unending string of boppy pop to accompany me around
] Safeway.
]
] Maybe it’s because iTunes makes it easy to binge-buy or
] download songs as singles. Or maybe it’s simply that
] there’s no incriminating CD jewel box to clutter my
] shelves. But somehow my playlists include Emma Bunton and
] ‘The Power of Love’ by Huey Lewis and the News. I
] know that Huey Lewis had other songs but I do not care to
] hear them. And yet, I have sometimes pondered whether
] there is some merit in downloading Lulu, our
] suspiciously-youthful, toy-boy chasing banshee answer to
] Cher.

[ An interesting note about the urge to collect, without reason...

As someone with a full up 20 gig iPod, and a lot more tracks that won't make it on there at the same time, i fully understand the pak rat mentality when it comes to music. I want to be in a position to say "Yeah, I got that..." to anyone who happens to come over for a party or whatever. It's an obsession that one has to carefully keep in check, no doubt.

I wish this article would go further, but I guess he was too busy buying tunes... -k]

Scotsman.com News - Features - If you're carrying a horse with no name around, fine-tune your music collection

Hijexx wrote:
] Decius wrote:
]
] ] Sinclair's statement on their decision to cancel the Koppel
] ] broadcast. I meme this because I prefer raw arguement to a
] ] journalist's summary thereof. Reach your own conclusions.

[ In support of Decius' call, here's the post I made on the initial story memed on this topic by Acidus : http://www.memestreams.net/thread/bid12512/blogid4004079

] I think his statement is reasonable. As the owner of these
] stations it is Sinclair's choice to make.

In the sense that all companies have the right to choose how to run their business, this is correct, and I can't necessarily offer a legal challenge to what they did, but as I tried to convey in my post, I believe they have an ethical obligation that should be paramount in their decision making process.

] I agree that ABC is going to use this to send a message. It
] is no coincidence that they are broadcasting this on the eve
] of the anniversary of the end of "major combat operations."
] That the insurgency happened this month and the news of
] coalition torture of Iraqis is hitting will only serve to
] soften where ABC was going to put the dagger anyway. I have
] no doubt this was planned for April 30th for a long time.

It's incredibly disturbing that soldier's sacrifices are used to political ends, by both sides of the debate, but they simply are. The right, the obligation i think, for the public to truly understand the costs of war outweigh the concerns of the relatively few. I don't believe enough people get it... they hear about soldiers dying and insurgency and they turn off their minds, or else the reports become an everyday background noise, which ceases to be meaningful in any way. Senator John McCain offered specific words about that in his letter to Sinclair (here: http://mccain.senate.gov/index.cfm?fuseaction=NewsCenter.ViewPressRelease&Content_id=1276) :
every American has a responsibility to understand fully the terrible costs of war and the extraordinary sacrifices it requires of those brave men and women who volunteer to defend the rest of us; lest we ever forget or grow insensitive to how grave a decision it is for our government to order Americans into combat. It is a solemn responsibility of elected officials to accept responsibility for our decision and its consequences, and, with those who disseminate the news, to ensure that Americans are fully informed of those consequences.

McCain, of course, was before and remains now an ardent supporter of the Iraq war.

Also, I'd like to point out that I don't believe Sinclair's decision was altruistic at it's heart, though I'm not so cynical as to believe this was purely partisan. Publicly denying this show is just as political as ABC deciding to air it, and the execs know that full well. They're playing the same game.

I'll leave by addressing one mo... [ Read More (0.2k in body) ]

RE: Sinclair Broadcast Group: For the record

] I write to strongly protest your decision to instruct
] Sinclair's ABC affiliates to preempt this
] evening's Nightline program. I find deeply offensive
] Sinclair's objection to Nightline's intention
] to broadcast the names and photographs of Americans who
] gave their lives in service to our country in Iraq.
]
] I supported the President's decision to go to war in
] Iraq, and remain a strong supporter of that decision. But
] every American has a responsibility to understand fully
] the terrible costs of war and the extraordinary
] sacrifices it requires of those brave men and women who
] volunteer to defend the rest of us; lest we ever forget
] or grow insensitive to how grave a decision it is for our
] government to order Americans into combat. It is a solemn
] responsibility of elected officials to accept
] responsibility for our decision and its consequences,
] and, with those who disseminate the news, to ensure that
] Americans are fully informed of those consequences.
]
] There is no valid reason for Sinclair to shirk its
] responsibility in what I assume is a very misguided
] attempt to prevent your viewers from completely
] appreciating the extraordinary sacrifices made on their
] behalf by Americans serving in Iraq. War is an awful, but
] sometimes necessary business. Your decision to deny your
] viewers an opportunity to be reminded of war%u2019s
] terrible costs, in all their heartbreaking detail, is a
] gross disservice to the public, and to the men and women
] of the United States Armed Forces. It is, in short, sir,
] unpatriotic. I hope it meets with the public opprobrium
] it most certainly deserves.

[ John McCain proves again that you can garner respect and admiration without pandering. I disagree with damn near all his political stances, but I absolutely respect the honesty and commitment to *public service* with which he approaches his job. I'm glad someone with a little clout is responding to this situation -- my rant earlier, while genuine, isn't likely to go far. -k]

U.S. Senator John McCain -- Letter to Sinclair

] relatively insignificant controversies from the
] candidates' youth will drown out discussion of the
] momentous issues that will confront the commander in
] chief in the coming four years. Mr. Bush's precise
] whereabouts in 1973, and whether Mr. Kerry threw away his
] medals or his ribbons -- these seem to us to matter
] somewhat less than how the two men might differ in policy
] toward Iraq or North Korea.

[ A good point in this WaPo editorial, though not a new wish. I think all of us would like both sides to approach this battle honestly and address their contentions on factual bases rather than exaggeration and ideological posturing. Alas, i don't see it happening. The day Bush condemns a repub senator for maligning Kerry isn't likely to be soon. -k]

Fighting the Wrong Battles (washingtonpost.com)

] Strategically, the I.B.M. approach is quite different
] from technology leaders, like Intel and Microsoft, that
] specialize in either hardware or software. "In the
] future, advantage is not going to be so much in the chip
] or the operating system, but in the management and
] control layer of technology," Mr. Zeitler said.

[ I read a bit about IBM's virtualization plans a few years ago and found it really compelling. It's interesting to see the tech come to commodity priced hardware... that's a bit unexpected, but ultimately good, i think.

The "return of the mainframe paradigm" has been a floating meme for some time now... i wonder how much traction it will ultimately have. Certainly if any company is in a position to bring together the necessary tech to work it, IBM is the one, I'd say.

My feeling is that the centralization may be illusory -- the part of the paradigm in which your relatively low power workstation offloads computation will come back, but the "mainframe" it offloads to may well be a broad distributed system, possibly a global, public one, though that may be the excess of scifi i've read.

I for one would be right on board with a super thin, super light, wireless tablet which offloads almost all of it's heavy lifting to other nodes. Perhaps even the data storage could be distributed...

ok, rampant speculation mode off... -k]

I.B.M. Plans to Build Servers That Act Like Mainframes