I love the Economist. They eviscerate the Democrats and Republicans with impunity. The last sentence from the leader of their most recent issue is great:
Two years ago, this newspaper narrowly favoured Mr Kerry’s incoherence over Mr Bush’s incompetence (see article). Since then, Republican incompetence has exceeded even our worst fears. How depressing to report that Democratic incoherence has soared too. America deserves better.
A very interesting UCLA study on media bias finds that most mainstream media do lean to the left. I think this is true, although I cannot help but question a couple of the methodologies. For example, it looks like there is an implicit assumption in the ADA score that every issue has a liberal side and a conservative side, and that they are equally far from the center. Also, I wonder how closely the scores of the media outlets track with their audiences – i.e. do more liberal people use mainstream media for their news?
Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist… 12/14/2005
A fascinating and courageous post by Baris Karadogan about a potential societal future where harems become more popular than monogamy. Would be a great basis for a science fiction novel, because it explores why the Internet could enable this change in behavior.
A good explanation of what’s wrong with the patent system in the US, and why. Better yet, it includes some real proposals for fixing the problem. Thanks JohnK for the pointer.
Our proposed reforms start with the recognition that much of the information needed to decide if a given application should be approved is in the hands of competitors of the applicant, rather than the USPTO. A review process with multiple levels efficiently balances the need to bring in outside information with the reality that most patents are unimportant. Multilevel review — with barriers to invoking review increasing at higher levels, along with the review’s thoroughness — would naturally focus attention on the most potentially important applications. Most patents would never receive anything other than the most basic examinations. But for those applications that really mattered, parties would have an incentive and opportunities to bring information in their possession before the USPTO, and the USPTO would have more resources to help it make the right decision. (Changes in this direction are at the heart of the patent reform bill currently under consideration in the House Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet and Intellectual Property.)
Penn Jillette (of Penn & Teller) on NPR’s show This I Believe. Awesome.
My cousins are in Kazakhstan right now, in the middle of 5-6 week adoption process. Their emails about their new boy are incredibly heartwarming. Last night I got the email below:
Dear Friends and Family,
We are sending this out to alert everyone about an upcoming Primetime on ABC broadcast on December 1. It is about a girl who was adopted by a single father and was abused by him for years. Pornographic pictures of her were placed on the internet. She was removed from the man several years ago, but the story received new attention this spring when her picture was again seen on the internet and they launched a search for her, not knowing she had been removed years previously.
The information we have is that the show is going to be very negative, equating international adoption with human trafficking. The National Council for Adoption has insisted that they be interviewed to show the positive side of international adoption. After all that has happened these past 8 months, this story could have a very negative impact. (The story did receive publicity in Russia when it surfaced again this spring). The Russian duma is meeting again and this is ammunition for those opposed to international adoption. Russian adoption programs place over a thousand children a year in loving homes and their programs are not the only ones that hang in the balance here.
We need to have ABC news bombarded with emails from the adoption community letting them know the detrimental effect a one-sided story can have and the thousands of families and children that they can harm with an unbalanced story. This child represents only one out of thousands upon thousands of children who have been given a chance at a good life through adoption.
Many pre and post adoptions steps have been taken to address the risk to children(including the prohibition of adoption by single men – unfortunately for those with good intent). Many of you have been aware of the process that we have gone through and know that adopted children have a much greater likelihood of well-screened and supported parents than countless biological and domestically fostered children. This provocative program, if onesided as planned, would not be beneficial- but it is likely to ensure that thousands more children will remain in orphanages every year until they are 16 or 17 years old, then to be cast out into the world after an early life with far too little attention, education or love. Life rarely gets better then. Adoption is their chance at a stable and happy life and we would appreciate your help in defending that chance and speaking out for balanced, responsible reporting.
Please take a moment to write to ABC Primetime by clicking on the following link
Please tell everyone you think might be concerned about this upcoming story and encourage them to take action as well.
Here is the letter that I wrote:
Dear sir/madam:
I am writing with regard to an upcoming Primetime episode due to be aired on Dec 1 about an abusive father who adopted a girl. As I understand it, this is a story that is several years old, and although horrific, most likely an isolated incident.
International adoption agencies have many controls in place to prevent such atrocities. I urge you to present this side of the story completely, starting with an interview with the National Council for Adoption. Better yet, pull the story completely, as publicizing such abuse may actually encourage other criminals to try similar acts.
Thousands of orphaned and homeless children deserve good homes with loving parents who want them in the USA and other countries. Please do not put a damper on this by focusing on one specific failure of the system.
Thank you.
Tom Shields
I have been unable to confirm this information through Google searching, but I did find a couple of other blogs that mention this.
Louisa and I went to hear Colin Powell speak tonight, and we were pretty impressed. He was witty, articulate, and down to earth. Clearly he hasn’t been a career politician – he doesn’t pull his punches enough.
Going in, we were a little surprised that there were some protesters carrying signs, chanting, and even one with a megaphone. We didn’t realize that his speaking would be controversial, especially since he’s no longer in the administration. Probably 20-40 people carried signs like “2000 Americans dead – for what?”
We had forgotten our tickets, but Louisa sweet-talked our way in based on our season ticket membership. Since we had swapped nights, we didn’t know what seats we were supposed to have, but we got hold of our babysitter, and she eventually found them in the stack of papers that used to be our desk, so we even got the reserved seats near the front.
Colin started out with some very funny stories, and had us laughing early. He talked about his early career, and many of the political figures he worked with. We enjoyed the stories, but wondered when he would get around to the meat of his talk.
About a half hour in, a couple folks stood up in the back, wearing sheets covered with red writing or faux blood, and paper masks, and started chanting “Powell lied, Iraqis died”. Folks tried to ignore them, but they were pretty insistent. Powell handled them well, acknowledging their message, and asking them to respect the fact that he would talk about Iraq later in his talk. They kept chanting, and one yelled “Why did you lie?” at him. He replied directly: “I did not lie. You have no idea what we went through at the State Department during that time.” He then mentioned that he had answered their question, and would they please sit back down. Eventually they made their way to the aisle, still chanting, and were escorted out of the building. Powell asked, “Anybody else?” to get a laugh, then continued. He handled it very well.
Finally he talked about the challenges and opportunities he sees. He thinks Europe and what used to be the Soviet bloc are on the right track to good relations and trade. He thinks China is a great trading partner, and is making rapid strides in all areas. He thinks we are falling down in Africa, not giving enough aid, and failing to address the HIV/AIDS problem.
He finally talked about Iraq. He acknowledged that they were wrong in their assessment of WMD, but insisted that they acted on the information they had. He also thinks we should have finished the job right away, maintaining tight security and putting in place the new government before the insurgents had a chance to take hold. He does not support pulling out, as chaos would reign, and all our effort would be for nothing.
If he had one wish, though, he would wish for an independent Palestinian state living in peace with Israel. He thinks there is an opportunity now, with Arafat gone, and Sharon moving in the right direction.
He concluded his remarks with some comments about America. He thinks we as a people naturally help others, and welcome others into our country, and that we need to keep that up. He thinks our position of power obligates us to help other countries through tough times. And he implored us to teach our children the respect, humility, and “sense of shame” they need to succeed in the world.
I was surprised by his candor – for example, he mentioned that Bush 43 (“W”) could take a strong position and stick with it long after another person might revisit in light of new information. I was delighted by his humor, and his stories were great. We gave him a well-deserved standing ovation. The world needs more people like him – I don’t always agree with him, but I trust him.
I was called for Jury Duty last week. The usual drill call the night before to see if youre needed. This time I got a slightly different message: call back again at 11:15, to see if youre needed at 12:45.
So, I went to work, and of course completely forgot to call. At 12:45, in the middle of partner meeting, I looked at my watch, jumped up, and ran out of the room. I bent a few laws getting to South San Francisco in about 15 mins, and ran into the room just as they were finishing the briefing. Fortunately, there were a few nice folks who clued me in to what was going on.
I had also forgotten my paperwork, so I had to fill out some stuff, then it was just the usual waiting. Fortunately, the San Mateo court system has entered the 21st century, and they had free WiFi – hallelujah! I surfed and did email for a couple hours, then got called.
The judge explained that this was a criminal trial expected to last less than a week, so they were going to be tough on the hardship excuses. I thought long and hard before deciding to claim hardship, because I’d really like to serve on a jury someday. In the end, though, with some portfolio company emergencies going on, I made my excuses and convinced the judge to let me go.
Next time jury duty comes up, I’ll probably try to treat it like a vacation week. Basically, I won’t schedule anything critical, and that way, if it’s a reasonable trial period, I’ll have it scheduled. Better yet, I’d love to have more flexibility when they call me – the week you picked isn’t good, but 2 weeks out looks fine, let’s go with that one. I’d be happy to serve, but it needs to fit into my schedule – is that a classic Gen X viewpoint or what?
I love this. Souter voted to take away some homes in New London, so somebody decided to try giving him a taste of his own medicine.
AP Wire | 07/24/2005 | Welcome to Hotel Souter? Eminent domain ruling triggers backlash
An interesting commentary on the other major Supreme Court decision, the one classifying cable companies as information services, and therefore immune from regulations requiring them to allow access for third party internet information providers. If they exercise this new power, it could be ugly.
The Clicker: Was Grokster really the important Supreme Court decision? – Engadget – www.engadget.com
Oxyfish is proudly powered by
WordPress
Entries (RSS)
and Comments (RSS).