Mark Watson's opinions on Java, Ruby, Lisp, AI, and the Semantic Web

Horrible supreme court decision! A great deal for international corporations to get to powerfully affect our internal elections in the USA. I don't want to overstate my opinion, but I think that this is the beginning of the end for fair representative democracy in our country. I hate to say it, but I am so fed up with the greed and avarice of the "elites" that I find myself not caring much about politics anymore. It would be a good first step for all members of the supreme court to publicly state any family members' business affiliations that might affect their rulings on cases. The justices have a long road to regain our trust.

On a more positive note, I do feel more like a 'citizen of the world' and I believe that stronger business and personal relationships with people around the world help offset the terribly high level of corruption in the USA and other countries that don't give good service to tax payers.

This is a simple prediction to make: corrupt governments will over time become less competitive for promoting and encouraging productive business activities in their tax jurisdictions. I am all for strong corporations and strong businesses both large and small. What I am against is what I consider to be illegal activities (or activities that should be illegal). We need a small government that enforces a small number of fair laws and then stays out of the way of doing business. Sadly, that is far from what we have now.

Labels: economy, politics

This is the text of the speech he is scheduled to give in a few days.

Well worth reading since some crazy right wingers have been telling lies and sowing so much disinformation. I have very much appreciated some conservative pundits who have publicly called this disinformation "stupid." Not all conservatives put the well being of their political party above the well being of our country. Good for them for speaking up!

When I was in grade school, a friend's father, who was conservative, helped arrange for our whole class to get to see President John F. Kennedy speak. I think that my friend's Dad disagreed with President Kennedy on things political, but he wanted his son and his son's classmates to hear a President speak.

There is a lot of anti-American rhetoric coming from some conservatives - it is up to the rest us, the majority I think, to speak up and point out stupidity when we hear it.

Labels: politics

With all of the problems that my country is facing, I am still optimistic, if:

Parents do their job and turn off the TV after dinner. When I was in high school I did 2 to 3 hours a night of homework on week nights - that should, I think, be the norm for the new young generation.

Young people do their job and squeeze every bit of value from the educational opportunities that they have at their disposal.

Adults do their job and realize that education and job skills are something that they need to develop continually throughout their working lives. Be productive and prosper.

Congress and our president: suck it up, stop being bought off, and do what is right. Look out for your karma, try not not be total assholes.

Financial elite: realize that no matter how much money you accrue, your children and grandchildren need to live in this world so you should not ruin the world that they will need to live in. Suck it up and try doing the right thing for change. Look out for your karma, try not not be total assholes.

As a country, we need to work together and everyone do their part.

Labels: economy, politics

Here in the USA, we face a tough choice: to survive with any kind of lifestyle and robustness, we need to defund government spending on:

• Huge government subsidies to the Insurance companies, Beef Industry, etc. Subsidies may also take the form of not collecting a fair tax burden and for "under-regulating" corporations that strongly act against the public interest.
• Drastic curtailment of defense spending
• Elimination of the large amounts of money we give/loan to other countries to buy weapon systems from companies in the USA

Why are these tough choices? Well, because Congress (and the executive branch under Bush and Obama) mostly look out for corporate interests and not citizens' interests - that is just the way it is. Also a tough choice because almost everyone is simply too lazy to spend the effort to personally lobby their elected representatives.

Perhaps people get the government that they deserve.

Labels: economy, politics

I just made a small donation to Canonical (good shepard for Ubuntu Linux) while I was installing some security updates. A good investment.

As a few very large corporations continue to control resources and major infrastructure, I expect to see a trend towards small agile enterprises covering rapidly changing technology and business niches. I expect to see a three-way synergy between mega-size corporations, small agile businesses, and a mobile highly educated work force: all three sides win big. The losers in this new world order are the poor and the poorly educated workers who can not adapt to changing situations.

I think that open source software, other key infrastructure supported by the users of the infrastructure, and a general gift economy will continue to reduce down to a minimum the cost of doing business. Again, the winners are both people who are well educated and prepared on a global scale to move quickly to take advantage of new situations, or people who prepare themselves for work in high-value local jobs like health care, critical government services (fire control, police, etc.), and support of local physical infrastructure.

I believe that both my country (USA) and most of the world are going through a historic transformation created mostly by a new higher level of transparency. Throughout history, the ultra rich and powerful have worked behind the scenes to amass more power and wealth by starting wars, etc. The same things still happen, but now society better understands what is really happening: corporate ownership of governments, who benefits financially from planned wars, strife, and the manipulation of the world's financial infrastructure.

I believe that the "information genie" is out of the bottle, and is not going back in.

Predicting the future is tricky, and I will not try. Still, it will be interesting to see how the general quality of world-scale governance improves or degrades in a future that blends meritocracy (those who get great educations and are major producers will compete with conventional multi-generational dynasties of controllers), greater transparency mostly due to the Internet, and near absolute corporate control and manipulation of governments and news media.

Ideally, in the new world order governments become "infrastructure" in the sense that governments compete to provide:

• Highest quality of physical infrastructure services for the lowest tax base
• Highest quality of resources for education (which needs to cover people throughout their entire lives)
• Physical security for people living in and businesses in their jurisdictions, at the lowest cost
• etc.

We all live in interesting times :-)

Labels: economy, politics

This article describes something that we need more of: people and businesses realizing that our society, with the current economic correction, is going through historic changes and people need to pull together. In this case, pulling together means higher paid workers agreeing to take pay and benefits cuts (and perhaps shortened work weeks) to help protect people at their hospital in the lower pay grades.

This is exactly what we need: less greed and avarice, and more working together as a community.

BTW, I have not been doing much tech blogging: I am immensely enjoying work on my new book for APress "Intelligent Scripting for Web 3.0" and after writing 20+ pages a week, it is more fun to write about the economy :-) My work on the book should mostly be done in about 4 weeks, and then things will get back to normal.

BTW, part 2: I have a good idea for a short tech book that I am thinking of publishing on this blog, one chapter at a time. I can take advantage of people's useful blog comments to edit older chapters "in place." I will need a break from serious writing, so it may be several months before I try this.

Labels: economy, politics

This could almost be funny if it were not such a serious matter: House and Senate bills HR 875 and S 425 are a "dream come true" for the big agro-corporations: force people to buy industrially grown food.

History teaches us that "victory gardens", home vegetable gardens, and community gardens are both a first line of defense during national emergencies and help make our economy and society more resilient. If you have any Russian friends, ask them about how local farming was literally a life saver for some people when the Soviet Union collapsed. The value of local food production is self evident, but very much against big business interests.

I contacted my representative and senators and politely asked them to vote against HR 875 and S 425. Please consider doing the same - thank you.

Labels: food, politics

I have not read through "The Reasoned Schemer" in a long while, and since it is such a light (to carry) book I thought that it would be perfect for standing in line reading :-)

BTW, I do not know anyone who is not voting in this election. Whoever you prefer, McCain or Obama, vote!

Labels: politics

www.npr.org

Perplexed by the U.S. economy? You're not alone. Law professor Michael Greenberger joins Fresh Air to explain the sub-prime mortgage crisis, credit defaults, the shaky future of other types of loans and what we can expect from the U.S. financial markets.

Greenberger is a professor at the University of Maryland School of Law and the director of the University's Center for Health and Homeland Security.

This is a long listen (39 minutes), but is the sort of thing that if every voting American listened to, and if every politician in Washington knew everyone listened to, that a lot of the future corruption in Washington might be avoided. Professor Greenberger also gives very solid advice on what we must do as a country to avoid having Asian countries "eat our lunch": emphasize science and technology and build companies that produce real products - and don't idolize people and companies who make money speculating instead of producing. I liked that he seemed to think our problems are fixable, but only with positive action. Listening to this interview, and then emailing your 2 senators and your representative in congress regarding this material would be a good start.

Labels: economy, politics

I am going to loan my copy of The Millionaire Next Door to my kids and nieces as a guide for long term wealth building - this entertaining book is a road map for building wealth instead of living a consumption based life style.

Since many more economists are now warning about the serious structural problems in our economy (that the war in Iraq is keeping out of the public consciousness), it occurred to me that Stanley and Danko's advice on money management and life style also apply to protecting you and your family from economic downturns. I am old enough to have lived through several economic "boom and bust" cycles, and one thing that has always caught my attention is that during "boom" economic times, a lot of people seem to believe that the good times will never end. In fact cycles are natural, should not be feared, and should be planned for.

Labels: economy, politics

I just sent this link to my family and friends with the joke that the news media, in this case the New York Times, feeling guilty for not doing their proper job during during the run up to the Iraq invasion has finally decided to tell the truth about food :-)

This article on food and nutrition strikes a cord with me for another reason: I have friends who worry about future shortages of potable water and energy. I believe that the solution to future resource problems is simple: let the free market determine the costs of the food that we eat. A case in point: why should Congress give the beef industry about $40 billion a year in free water subsidies?

Raising meat for food rather than plants does the following:

• Uses 10 times the water
• Uses 10 times the energy
• Generates horrendous pollution of the air and underground water supplies
• Raises health care costs caused by unhealthy eating habits

I think that it is fine to eat meat, but we only need tiny portions each day to augment a primarily vegetarian diet.

It all comes down to a personal choice not to be a glutton, be it gluttony for food, buying large fuel inefficient vehicles, or houses larger than your family needs for comfortable living that you will never be able to own (i.e., pay off the mortgage). I believe that water and energy resource problems are solvable with free market economics and raising our collective consciousness concerning the downside of gluttonous life styles.

Labels: economy, health, nutrition, politics

I was reading people's opinions on Slashdot this morning about Microsoft's indirect attack on Linux through Novell and saw an example of the New World Order at work: an entrenched corporation fighting against a distributed movement for free and open source software. If you enjoy history, then you know that the rich and powerful have always bought and influenced governments but I believe that the New World Order of Corporate Power is something different:

• More transparent: with the Internet, it is too difficult to contain information and free speech - a good push-back against corporate consolidation and control of news media for their own interests. With more transparency, it is possible for people to be more aware of corruption and control.
• The world is even less of a "zero sum game". When Spain recovered huge deposits of gold, emeralds, etc. in the New World, they increased the money supply (gold) but also spurred other European nations to other areas of technological inferiority that had valuable resources. Although slowed down by energy costs, we now see opportunities around the world open up - someone winning does not always mean that someone has to lose. (In the context of this blog: I see a win-win situation between proprietary software and with free and open source software, with competition between the two approaches as a good thing.)
• Countries/corporations that move early to alternative energy sources will have a large long term advantage as the price of oil increases
• Real value vs. vapor: with the fiat U.S. currency (I have seen estimates that the privately owned Federal Reserve has increased the supply of dollars by about 20% so far this year - the cost of printing money is much less than the current "value" of money!) common people do not own much real equity value: any money they hold has dubious value when a private group of individuals has control over inflation, etc.; people tend to not have much real equity anymore in their homes and are at extreme economic risk when inevitable real estate value crashes occur (they always occur - it is just difficult to say when they might occur). Real value is in industrial production capability, education that enables "high up the food chain" employment and entrepreneur-ship, intellectual property, trade and business partnerships, etc. It is not difficult to see that except for high valued education/job skills and the entrepreneurial success stories, that most real value lies in the control of large corporations and the individuals who have capital and ownership of these corporations.
• Formally third world countries are enjoying a major upswing in the percentage of middle class workers while established industrial nations are seeing a greater separation between the very rich and a shrinking middle class and the poor. This is natural: areas of very low cost of living that can supply well educated and motivated workers draw in business development, research and development, manufacturing infrastructure.

I think that as much as the world looks more "global", that we will see a huge difference in economic success between countries (and trading blocks that share laws affecting business and trade) that either:

• Allow corporations to do business but do impose minimal laws to encourage business growth at all levels. Or:
• Allow corporations to do business and through corruption or other processes discourage business growth and development for all but the largest corporations.

Minimal government is best but some government and fairness in laws and enforcement of laws is required to maximize economic growth and the general good.

I believe that in the future talented people will naturally migrate to countries that provide minimal but fair government and give people good value for their (hopefully small) taxes. Countries like the USA (my country) where a very large fraction of people's federal income taxes goes to pay interest (on previous government expense overruns) to the private individuals who own the Federal Reserve will be at a competitive disadvantage as taxes have to keep rising to pay off previous debts. In a very real sense, government spending overruns enrich the most wealthy people. Small surprise.

What can people do to build more value instead of vapor? A few things come to mind:

• If possible prefer to reside in regions of low tax and high economic growth.
• Prefer more education to less. Prefer training in high skilled jobs that must be performed "on site" and can not be done remotely.
• Prefer investment in corporations with real production value, real property, scarce resources, etc. Prefer to not take out a second loan on your home to buy a new SUV that is better than the one your brother in law bought last week.

The great thing is that we all have control over our decisions in life. While external events can affect the results of our decisions, we still get to decide how to allocate our personal resources and how to live our lives. Self Responsibility = Self Empowerment.

Labels: business, politics

Exit polls shows that 3/4 of voters favored Democratic candidates because of government corruption. I hope that the new House of Representatives lives up to its responsibilities to thoroughly investigate and act on:

• Illegal lobbying
• Illegal lobbying by foreign governments
• Outlaw riders on bills in Congress: lately some obscene riders have been attached to important bills
• Outlaw voice votes on Bills: let us always know how Congress people vote!

My sincere hope is that no single political party ever again controls both houses of Congress and the Presidency.

Labels: politics

I just made a small donation to the EFF for helping to monitor the electronic voting machines in the upcoming election:

http://secure.eff.org/friends2006

I urge you to do the same. The Electronic Frontier Foundation is a great group that I have been supporting for years.

Be you a Democrat or Republican, I hope that we can all agree that fair elections with one person, one vote is the cornerstone of our society and government.

Labels: politics

Long term, it is bad news that North Korea has had a successful nuclear test. Short term I am more concerned about the unstable government in Pakistan with their existing nuclear weapons (General Musharraf took control 8 years ago in a military coup, has never faced an election, and is unpopular in his own country - a country with few natural resources, increasing population pressures, etc. - who gets these nuclear weapons if the Musharraf government falls?) Also, many people in the Middle East and Europe are concerned with Israel's nuclear weapons. I believe that it is time for our government to start one-on-one negotiations with countries like Iran, Syria, and North Korea. Public "negotiations" are seldom effective - we need closed door sessions with top level diplomats (private, so egos do not get in the way).

On happier news: Japan is "officially" recovered from its severe 15 year economic slump. Less happy is a comparison between the assets that Japan had to survive economic hard times that we in the USA do not have (and make no mistake, a severe economic downturn will hit us in the future):

• Personal savings: citizens in Japan had relatively large personal savings that they could rely on for living expenses (consumer savings in the USA is close to zero, considering people who increase their debt with second loans on their homes, etc.)
• Japan had low defense costs (the USA spends as much money on defense than the next 24 countries in the world combined)
• Japan had healthy industrial infrastructure with modern factory equipment (the USA is way behind the curve in updating basic infrastructure like factory equipment and our road and highway systems)
• The government of Japan did not have the huge deficits that the government in the USA has.
• The government of Japan did not have the huge foreign debts that the government in the USA has.

Labels: business, economy, politics