Scientific Blogging: Official Blog Of The "Rise Of The Citizen-Scientist" H+ Summit: "- Sent using Google Toolbar"
"The Year Of (insert your favorite cause here)" is usually driven by marketing departments and often to correspond to some sort of milestone. 2009 was "The Year of..." both Galileo and Darwin, for example, though no one seemed to find a way to bring either to mainstream popularity and make a buck.
What about 2010? Sure, the UN declared 2010 the 'International Year of Biodiversity' but, like most things the UN is involved in, it cost a lot of money and doesn't actually do anything. Outside science, 2010 is the Year of the Nurse. Everyone likes nurses.
In hindsight, 2010 may be the year Craig Venter, the bad boy of science, created 'artificial' life in Big Science. 2010 could also be the year of the Higgs Boson (though bureaucrats also said it would be 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006 and 2005, given CERN's desire to hype up the LHC) but let's remain a little cautious on that one until birds stop leaving baguettes in the machinery and causing it to break.
But 2010 may also be the year science went small again - citizen science.
Citizen Science is nothing new, of course. Before the last half of the 20th century there was no big science so most science societies were not composed of government-funded academics but instead knowledgeable laypeople. They cataloged and argued and analyzed and shared what they found. Obviously some of the universe's bigger mysteries can't be tackled on the individual level, but even big projects can be aided by citizen scientists, as shown by efforts like Galaxy Zoo and FoldIt in astronomy and biology, respectively.
And it's catching on. The USA National Phenology Network, a program by the U.S. Geological Survey and the University of Arizona, is for citizen phenologists who want to study recurring plant and animal life cycle stages while Cornell has a Citizen Science bird watching program. If you want to do lots of different projects, Science for Citizens has numerous different ways you can help.
Big science today is even assisted by citizen science from the past. Dr. Elizabeth Boakes
from the Natural Environment Research Council (Nerc) Centre for Population Biology at Imperial College London, was able to analyze 170,000 records for 127 gamebird species across Europe and Asia dating back over the past two centuries, thanks to private journals and letters by citizen scientists - an achievement that may not be possible in the future, she says, because the last few decades have seen organizational focus endangered species instead.
But what about the science of the future? Will small science be big again thanks to boosts in individual human thought? One group thinks technological changes will modify the meaning of what it is to be human and citizen science could be a part of it. Given enough access to data, they believe, citizen scientists could discover how to slow aging, unlock human (and artificial) intelligence, and even leave the planet.
Transhumanism has been controversial since its popularity in the early 1980s and will likely remain so. The idea of participant evolution has skeptics and some detractors dismiss its post-humanist aspects but, at its core, people in the transhumanism movement want to think about the future of mankind and science and that is what Science 2.0 is all about.
Since we're the only large readership site that allows people from a broad spectrum of occupations to share knowledge on complex science topics - science journalists, book authors, researchers and laypeople - we are the biggest citizen science site in the world, so it makes sense we would be the official blog of the "Rise of the Citizen-Scientist" summit at Harvard University on June 12th and 13th. Therefore I am pleased to announce we are.
Andrea Kuszewski will be a featured speaker there, discussing What Makes A Genius and how we might be able to engage our brain in order to maximize our cognitive growth, along with Ray Kurzweil, noted futurist, Stephen Wolfram, creator of Wolfram|Alpha, and Andrew Hessel, an outspoken advocate and champion of DNA technology.
The full list of speakers is at http://www.hplussummit.com/speakers.html but even more importantly, if you want to attend and did not buy your tickets yet, rather than accept money for promoting the event and hosting the blogging part of the conference, we wanted to give readers a discount on the tickets.
So if you log in through here or an ad on the site, you will receive 20% off. $50 you can then spend on coffee or ancient Chinese vases and get those antique dealers back to work. Here is the link.
Of course, before the event we will have a lot more to talk about, including a dedicated page (link coming soon) where people at the event can blog about the discussions and then send their thoughts out through our vast array of social media links in true viral fashion. It will be a good experiment on reaching the masses in citizen science using today's tools.
"2010: The Year of the Citizen Scientist" has a pretty good ring to it, don't you think?
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Google 'getting rid of Windows' | Technology | guardian.co.uk
Google 'getting rid of Windows' | Technology | guardian.co.uk: "Google 'getting rid of Windows'
Report claims Google has dumped Microsoft's Windows and is offering new staff the choice of Linux or Macintosh operating systems
* Digg it
* Buzz up
* Share on facebook
* Tweet this
*
Comments (…)
* Charles Arthur, technology editor
* guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 1 June 2010 14.59 BST
Google is reported to be getting rid of desktop PCs running Microsoft Windows across the corporation to eliminate a security risk.
The Financial Times reports that the company, which has more than 20,000 staff worldwide, is now offering new recruits the choice of using computers running the free Linux operating system or Apple Macintosh computers.
The company refused to confirm or deny the reports, issuing a brief comment saying that it would not discuss 'operational issues'.
Microsoft, however, claimed that the move was simply part of Google's attempts to standardise on its new in-house operating system, called ChromeOS.
The shift away from Windows is claimed to have begun in January, after Google realised that the operating system had been part of a chain of weaknesses that allowed a damaging attack against some of its core systems by Chinese hackers in December.
'Many people have been moved away from [Windows] PCs, mostly towards MacOS, following the China hacking attacks,' the FT quoted one unnamed Google employee as saying.
Another is quoted saying: 'We're not doing any more Windows. It is a security effort.'
Being pushed out of Google would be a major PR blow to Microsoft – although the two companies have an intense rivalry in the search business, where Google dominates, and in the provision of online editing of documents, spreadsheets, email and calendars, where Google says that 1,000 small and medium businesses are taking up its Google Docs offering every day.
Though the revenue implications are tiny for Microsoft, the suggestion that one of the largest online businesses is unable to secure Windows could have serious implications for its public standing.
Microsoft's Windows, with at least 95% of the corporate computing market, is a constant target for attacks by criminals and hackers looking to gain access and control to machines. The intrusion into Google – which compromised some of its most sensitive systems, and almost gave the hackers oversight of its Google Mail system before the attack was discovered – is believed to have come via malware targeted at users of Microsoft's Internet Explorer 6 browser running on Windows in its China offices last year.
However, Microsoft's head of PR, Frank Shaw, suggested that the FT had misinterpreted moves by Google to use its own new in-house PC operating system, Chrome. 'Bad headline, wrong premise here. Google going google, okay, but free pass from FT on reason = bad reporting,' he said on his Twitter account, before sarcastically adding: 'News flash: Google bans Bing from its computers. Must credit FT. Picture on Bing home page is distracting to G[oogle] engineers.'
A large number of businesses offer anti-malware protection – including Google itself, through its Postini subsidiary. But with expert hackers targeting previously undiscovered security holes in Windows and Internet Explorer – because it will be present by default on every computer running Windows – it is impossible to protect against every attack.
By contrast, there is little malware focussed on Linux desktop operating systems or Apple's Mac OS X. Both are Unix-based systems, but despite its being nine years old there are no viruses targeting Mac OS X. There are fewer than 100 viruses targeting Linux OSs, but the variety of 'flavours' of the operating system means that a virus effective against one will not work on another.
By contrast, there were more than 97,000 known viruses aimed at Windows, although modern malware targets individual applications such as Microsoft Word or Internet Explorer. Malware writers also target widely-used applications such as Adobe's Acrobat Reader, used to read PDF documents.
Some reports suggest that Google is allowing staff to run Windows on their laptops, but removing it from desktop machines. Keeping Windows reportedly requires clearance from 'quite senior levels' – by Ben Fried, a former Morgan-Stanley executive who is now the company's chief information officer, it is suggested.
But Google staff are also increasingly worried about the potential for their systems to be attacked if they use Windows, the FT says. 'Particularly since the China scare, a lot of people here are using Macs for security,' it quoted an unnamed employee as saying.
Google is also developing its own operating system, called ChromeOS, which is expected to preclude malware attacks by making it impossible to alter applications.
A Google spokesperson declined to comment on the specifics of the company's moves, but did not deny any of the claims made. The spokesperson said: 'We're always working to improve the efficiency of our business, but we do not comment on specific operational matters.'
Google has never confirmed the specific details of how its systems were hacked in China, but details have emerged through security companies which have followed up on parallel attacks made against a number of other non-Chinese companies.
- Sent using Google Toolbar"
Report claims Google has dumped Microsoft's Windows and is offering new staff the choice of Linux or Macintosh operating systems
* Digg it
* Buzz up
* Share on facebook
* Tweet this
*
Comments (…)
* Charles Arthur, technology editor
* guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 1 June 2010 14.59 BST
Google is reported to be getting rid of desktop PCs running Microsoft Windows across the corporation to eliminate a security risk.
The Financial Times reports that the company, which has more than 20,000 staff worldwide, is now offering new recruits the choice of using computers running the free Linux operating system or Apple Macintosh computers.
The company refused to confirm or deny the reports, issuing a brief comment saying that it would not discuss 'operational issues'.
Microsoft, however, claimed that the move was simply part of Google's attempts to standardise on its new in-house operating system, called ChromeOS.
The shift away from Windows is claimed to have begun in January, after Google realised that the operating system had been part of a chain of weaknesses that allowed a damaging attack against some of its core systems by Chinese hackers in December.
'Many people have been moved away from [Windows] PCs, mostly towards MacOS, following the China hacking attacks,' the FT quoted one unnamed Google employee as saying.
Another is quoted saying: 'We're not doing any more Windows. It is a security effort.'
Being pushed out of Google would be a major PR blow to Microsoft – although the two companies have an intense rivalry in the search business, where Google dominates, and in the provision of online editing of documents, spreadsheets, email and calendars, where Google says that 1,000 small and medium businesses are taking up its Google Docs offering every day.
Though the revenue implications are tiny for Microsoft, the suggestion that one of the largest online businesses is unable to secure Windows could have serious implications for its public standing.
Microsoft's Windows, with at least 95% of the corporate computing market, is a constant target for attacks by criminals and hackers looking to gain access and control to machines. The intrusion into Google – which compromised some of its most sensitive systems, and almost gave the hackers oversight of its Google Mail system before the attack was discovered – is believed to have come via malware targeted at users of Microsoft's Internet Explorer 6 browser running on Windows in its China offices last year.
However, Microsoft's head of PR, Frank Shaw, suggested that the FT had misinterpreted moves by Google to use its own new in-house PC operating system, Chrome. 'Bad headline, wrong premise here. Google going google, okay, but free pass from FT on reason = bad reporting,' he said on his Twitter account, before sarcastically adding: 'News flash: Google bans Bing from its computers. Must credit FT. Picture on Bing home page is distracting to G[oogle] engineers.'
A large number of businesses offer anti-malware protection – including Google itself, through its Postini subsidiary. But with expert hackers targeting previously undiscovered security holes in Windows and Internet Explorer – because it will be present by default on every computer running Windows – it is impossible to protect against every attack.
By contrast, there is little malware focussed on Linux desktop operating systems or Apple's Mac OS X. Both are Unix-based systems, but despite its being nine years old there are no viruses targeting Mac OS X. There are fewer than 100 viruses targeting Linux OSs, but the variety of 'flavours' of the operating system means that a virus effective against one will not work on another.
By contrast, there were more than 97,000 known viruses aimed at Windows, although modern malware targets individual applications such as Microsoft Word or Internet Explorer. Malware writers also target widely-used applications such as Adobe's Acrobat Reader, used to read PDF documents.
Some reports suggest that Google is allowing staff to run Windows on their laptops, but removing it from desktop machines. Keeping Windows reportedly requires clearance from 'quite senior levels' – by Ben Fried, a former Morgan-Stanley executive who is now the company's chief information officer, it is suggested.
But Google staff are also increasingly worried about the potential for their systems to be attacked if they use Windows, the FT says. 'Particularly since the China scare, a lot of people here are using Macs for security,' it quoted an unnamed employee as saying.
Google is also developing its own operating system, called ChromeOS, which is expected to preclude malware attacks by making it impossible to alter applications.
A Google spokesperson declined to comment on the specifics of the company's moves, but did not deny any of the claims made. The spokesperson said: 'We're always working to improve the efficiency of our business, but we do not comment on specific operational matters.'
Google has never confirmed the specific details of how its systems were hacked in China, but details have emerged through security companies which have followed up on parallel attacks made against a number of other non-Chinese companies.
- Sent using Google Toolbar"
Why the Digital Economy Act simply won't work | Cory Doctorow | Technology | guardian.co.uk
Why the Digital Economy Act simply won't work | Cory Doctorow | Technology | guardian.co.uk: "Why the Digital Economy Act simply won't work
Disconnecting downloaders will alienate the entertainment industry's most loyal customers
* Digg it
* Buzz up
* Share on facebook
* Tweet this
*
Comments (…)
* Cory Doctorow, by NK Guy, nkguy.com.tiff
*
o Cory Doctorow
o guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 1 June 2010 15.03 BST
With the passage into law of the dread Digital Economy Act comes Ofcom's guidelines that are the first step toward rules for when and how rightsholders will be able to disconnect entire families from the internet because someone on or near their premises is accused of copyright infringement.
Consumer rights groups and privacy groups – such as the Open Rights Group, the Citizens Advice Bureau, Which, and Consumer Focus – participated in the process, making the Ofcom rules as good as possible (an exercise that, unfortunately, is a little like making the guillotine as comfortable as possible).
But this isn't the last word in the copyfight – not even close. Because disconnection for downloaders will only serve to alienate entertainment industry customers (remember that the most avid downloaders are also the most avid buyers – 'most avid' being the operative word here – the 20% of customers who account for 80% of sales, downloading, concert tickets, box-office revenue, DVDs, T-shirts, action figures, etc). And because those who download most avidly will simply change tactics.
The entertainment industry's capacity to gather evidence and make accusations against downloaders relies on the fact that, at present, most downloading systems don't bother to encrypt the traffic or disguise the user's identity. Neither of these things are very hard to do, though both are computationally more expensive than the alternative. But, in case you haven't noticed, computation is getting cheaper all the time.
Once non-anonymous, non-encrypted downloading bears a significant risk, downloaders will simple switch to anonymised, encrypted alternatives.
For example, SSL-based proxies like Sweden's IPREDator (use of which is also a tonic against identity thieves and other creeps who may be monitoring your network connection) provide a nigh-impenetrable layer of misdirection that confounds anyone hoping to trace a download session back to a user. And services like Easynews.com provide encrypted access to enormous libraries of material including infringing copies of popular shows, music and movies.
So why worry? If users won't be deterred from downloading – and may even be driven to start taking care to protect their connections from snoops and creeps – then how bad will the Digital Economy Act be?
Bad.
Because the naive user who only downloads occasionally will still be in harm's way, as will his family or housemates if his connection is disconnected by an entertainment bully.
And because once the state decides that it has a duty to police the internet to maximise the profits of a few entertainment companies (no matter what the public expense), it sets itself on a path of ever-more-restrictive measures. Once disconnection drives downloaders to make use of SSL-based proxies, watch for Big Content to inveigle their friends in parliament to enact laws prohibiting the use of virtual private networks – never mind that these are the best practice of anyone trying to safeguard a corporate or organisational network.
Once the Act drives downloaders to use SSL-encrypted services that are harder to monitor, watch for the entertainment lobby to ask for great swaths of the internet to be blocked by the Great Firewall of Britain that the Act also provides for.
Once you swallow a spider to catch a fly, you're on a course to swallow a bird to catch the spider, a cat to catch the bird, and so on until you swallow a horse – and every toddler knows that happens next.
- Sent using Google Toolbar"
Disconnecting downloaders will alienate the entertainment industry's most loyal customers
* Digg it
* Buzz up
* Share on facebook
* Tweet this
*
Comments (…)
* Cory Doctorow, by NK Guy, nkguy.com.tiff
*
o Cory Doctorow
o guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 1 June 2010 15.03 BST
With the passage into law of the dread Digital Economy Act comes Ofcom's guidelines that are the first step toward rules for when and how rightsholders will be able to disconnect entire families from the internet because someone on or near their premises is accused of copyright infringement.
Consumer rights groups and privacy groups – such as the Open Rights Group, the Citizens Advice Bureau, Which, and Consumer Focus – participated in the process, making the Ofcom rules as good as possible (an exercise that, unfortunately, is a little like making the guillotine as comfortable as possible).
But this isn't the last word in the copyfight – not even close. Because disconnection for downloaders will only serve to alienate entertainment industry customers (remember that the most avid downloaders are also the most avid buyers – 'most avid' being the operative word here – the 20% of customers who account for 80% of sales, downloading, concert tickets, box-office revenue, DVDs, T-shirts, action figures, etc). And because those who download most avidly will simply change tactics.
The entertainment industry's capacity to gather evidence and make accusations against downloaders relies on the fact that, at present, most downloading systems don't bother to encrypt the traffic or disguise the user's identity. Neither of these things are very hard to do, though both are computationally more expensive than the alternative. But, in case you haven't noticed, computation is getting cheaper all the time.
Once non-anonymous, non-encrypted downloading bears a significant risk, downloaders will simple switch to anonymised, encrypted alternatives.
For example, SSL-based proxies like Sweden's IPREDator (use of which is also a tonic against identity thieves and other creeps who may be monitoring your network connection) provide a nigh-impenetrable layer of misdirection that confounds anyone hoping to trace a download session back to a user. And services like Easynews.com provide encrypted access to enormous libraries of material including infringing copies of popular shows, music and movies.
So why worry? If users won't be deterred from downloading – and may even be driven to start taking care to protect their connections from snoops and creeps – then how bad will the Digital Economy Act be?
Bad.
Because the naive user who only downloads occasionally will still be in harm's way, as will his family or housemates if his connection is disconnected by an entertainment bully.
And because once the state decides that it has a duty to police the internet to maximise the profits of a few entertainment companies (no matter what the public expense), it sets itself on a path of ever-more-restrictive measures. Once disconnection drives downloaders to make use of SSL-based proxies, watch for Big Content to inveigle their friends in parliament to enact laws prohibiting the use of virtual private networks – never mind that these are the best practice of anyone trying to safeguard a corporate or organisational network.
Once the Act drives downloaders to use SSL-encrypted services that are harder to monitor, watch for the entertainment lobby to ask for great swaths of the internet to be blocked by the Great Firewall of Britain that the Act also provides for.
Once you swallow a spider to catch a fly, you're on a course to swallow a bird to catch the spider, a cat to catch the bird, and so on until you swallow a horse – and every toddler knows that happens next.
- Sent using Google Toolbar"
The Proprietary Content Industry’s Strange Sympathies
The Proprietary Content Industry’s Strange Sympathies: "The Proprietary Content Industry’s Strange Sympathies
Posted by Kevin Carson on May 30, 2010 in Commentary • No comments
Bono, global do-gooder and patron saint of what’s variously known as cognitive, green, or “progressive” capitalism, a few months ago expressed his admiration for Chinese communist totalitarianism as a model for how to combat file-sharing: “…[W]e know from America’s noble effort to stop child pornography, not to mention China’s ignoble effort to suppress online dissent, that it’s perfectly possible to track content.”
Never mind ignoble–it just doesn’t work as well as all that, as Cory Doctorow noted on a past visit to China. The world’s largest prison state was unable to stop him from visiting any “subversive” online content he wanted, thanks to the miracle of proxy servers. Indeed China’s Falun Gong dissident movement has become a global specialist in developing proxy server technology for use by dissident movements around the world.
Bono’s remark does cause me to wonder, though, if people like Bill Gates who call the free culture movement “communists” might not be mirror-imaging.
And now it seems not all the proprietary content folks share Bono’s disdain for kiddie porn. At a U.S. Chamber of Commerce-sponsored event in Sweden, titled “Sweden–A Safe Haven for Pirates?,” Danish anti-piracy activist Johan Schluter said:
“Child pornography is great…. It is great because politicians understand child pornography. By playing that card, we can get them to act, and start blocking sites. And once they have done that, we can get them to start blocking file sharing sites.”
Well, hey, at least he’s honest. It’s like Dick and Liz Cheney coming right out and actually admitting “We pray every night for Al Qaeda to set off a nuke in New York so we can say we told you so.”
I’m just surprised to see all these proprietary content spokespersons who’ve apparently burnt out the filter in their brains that tells them “That’s one of those things you’re not supposed to say out loud.” Bono openly admits that nothing short of the surveillance and censorship machinery of a totalitarian state can protect digital copyright from infringement.
(But again, though, as Doctorow pointed out, even this won’t be enough. It’ll just be another wall to bring down.)
And Schluter admits to cheering on the sexual exploitation of children because the resulting outrage can be used to manipulate the public into supporting measures to support the profits of his own industry.
Well, I guess I’m not entirely clean myself, because I admit to some satisfaction in seeing a couple of spokesmen for proprietary content caught openly admitting to their own vileness. The more widely known it is just what these people will stoop to in order to protect their state-extorted gain, the better. The more people are aware of what snakes the Copyright Nazis are, and of their shameless project of turning the Internet into a gulag just so they can line their own pockets, the sooner the tide will turn against them.
Like the man said: “Is there a place for the hopeless sinner, who has hurt all mankind just to save his own? Believe it.”
- Sent using Google Toolbar"
Posted by Kevin Carson on May 30, 2010 in Commentary • No comments
Bono, global do-gooder and patron saint of what’s variously known as cognitive, green, or “progressive” capitalism, a few months ago expressed his admiration for Chinese communist totalitarianism as a model for how to combat file-sharing: “…[W]e know from America’s noble effort to stop child pornography, not to mention China’s ignoble effort to suppress online dissent, that it’s perfectly possible to track content.”
Never mind ignoble–it just doesn’t work as well as all that, as Cory Doctorow noted on a past visit to China. The world’s largest prison state was unable to stop him from visiting any “subversive” online content he wanted, thanks to the miracle of proxy servers. Indeed China’s Falun Gong dissident movement has become a global specialist in developing proxy server technology for use by dissident movements around the world.
Bono’s remark does cause me to wonder, though, if people like Bill Gates who call the free culture movement “communists” might not be mirror-imaging.
And now it seems not all the proprietary content folks share Bono’s disdain for kiddie porn. At a U.S. Chamber of Commerce-sponsored event in Sweden, titled “Sweden–A Safe Haven for Pirates?,” Danish anti-piracy activist Johan Schluter said:
“Child pornography is great…. It is great because politicians understand child pornography. By playing that card, we can get them to act, and start blocking sites. And once they have done that, we can get them to start blocking file sharing sites.”
Well, hey, at least he’s honest. It’s like Dick and Liz Cheney coming right out and actually admitting “We pray every night for Al Qaeda to set off a nuke in New York so we can say we told you so.”
I’m just surprised to see all these proprietary content spokespersons who’ve apparently burnt out the filter in their brains that tells them “That’s one of those things you’re not supposed to say out loud.” Bono openly admits that nothing short of the surveillance and censorship machinery of a totalitarian state can protect digital copyright from infringement.
(But again, though, as Doctorow pointed out, even this won’t be enough. It’ll just be another wall to bring down.)
And Schluter admits to cheering on the sexual exploitation of children because the resulting outrage can be used to manipulate the public into supporting measures to support the profits of his own industry.
Well, I guess I’m not entirely clean myself, because I admit to some satisfaction in seeing a couple of spokesmen for proprietary content caught openly admitting to their own vileness. The more widely known it is just what these people will stoop to in order to protect their state-extorted gain, the better. The more people are aware of what snakes the Copyright Nazis are, and of their shameless project of turning the Internet into a gulag just so they can line their own pockets, the sooner the tide will turn against them.
Like the man said: “Is there a place for the hopeless sinner, who has hurt all mankind just to save his own? Believe it.”
- Sent using Google Toolbar"
George W. Bush, War President (Harper's Magazine)
George W. Bush, War President (Harper's Magazine): "George W. Bush, War President
In a February 7, 2004 interview with NBC’s Tim Russert, George W. Bush said:
I’m a war president. I make decisions here in the Oval Office in foreign-policy matters with war on my mind. Again, I wish it wasn’t true, but it is true. And the American people need to know they got a president who sees the world the way it is. And I see dangers that exist, and it’s important for us to deal with them.
Now it turns out that Bush may have had a very different understanding of his role as a “war president.” In an interview with former Argentine president Néstor Kirchner, Oliver Stone learned that Bush claimed that waging war was a formula for economic growth. Here’s the key exchange:
kirchner: I said that a solution for the problems right now, I told Bush, is a Marshall Plan. And he got angry. He said the Marshall Plan is a crazy idea of the Democrats. He said the best way to revitalize the economy is war. And that the United States has grown stronger with war.
stone: War, he said that?
kirchner: He said that. Those were his exact words.
stone: Is he suggesting that South America go to war?
kirchner: Well, he was talking about the United States: “The Democrats had been wrong. All of the economic growth of the United States has been encouraged by wars.” He said it very clearly.
Here’s the video.
The interview was done for Stone’s new documentary, South of the Border, which is set for its theatrical release in June. The interview provides evidence that all those crazed leftists who claimed that Bush was pursuing war with Iraq for economic reasons perhaps weren’t so crazy after all.
- Sent using Google Toolbar"
In a February 7, 2004 interview with NBC’s Tim Russert, George W. Bush said:
I’m a war president. I make decisions here in the Oval Office in foreign-policy matters with war on my mind. Again, I wish it wasn’t true, but it is true. And the American people need to know they got a president who sees the world the way it is. And I see dangers that exist, and it’s important for us to deal with them.
Now it turns out that Bush may have had a very different understanding of his role as a “war president.” In an interview with former Argentine president Néstor Kirchner, Oliver Stone learned that Bush claimed that waging war was a formula for economic growth. Here’s the key exchange:
kirchner: I said that a solution for the problems right now, I told Bush, is a Marshall Plan. And he got angry. He said the Marshall Plan is a crazy idea of the Democrats. He said the best way to revitalize the economy is war. And that the United States has grown stronger with war.
stone: War, he said that?
kirchner: He said that. Those were his exact words.
stone: Is he suggesting that South America go to war?
kirchner: Well, he was talking about the United States: “The Democrats had been wrong. All of the economic growth of the United States has been encouraged by wars.” He said it very clearly.
Here’s the video.
The interview was done for Stone’s new documentary, South of the Border, which is set for its theatrical release in June. The interview provides evidence that all those crazed leftists who claimed that Bush was pursuing war with Iraq for economic reasons perhaps weren’t so crazy after all.
- Sent using Google Toolbar"
What’s Mine is Yours: The Rise of Collaborative Consumption
What’s Mine is Yours: The Rise of Collaborative Consumption: "- Sent using Google Toolbar"
What's Mine is Yours, Book Cover Book cover Design: Nicholas Blechman of Knickerbocker Design
Pre-Order. In stores September 28, 2010 Buy from AmazonBuy from Borders
Buy from Barnes & NobleBuy from 800CEORead
Join Our Mailing List
Or
Upcoming Events
Rachel will be speaking at Creative Sydney, at the Museum of Contemporary Art in Sydney, Australia on June 5th, 2010
Technology + Behaviors
What’s Mine is Yours: How are new models of peer-to-peer trading and the economy of shared ownership changing consumerism? MORE
Collaborative Consumption in the News
Fast Company — June 1, 2010
"Zipcar Whizzing Toward an IPO"
Zipcar is going public.
This is Money — May 19, 2010
"New social lending site to rival Zopa"
New P2P Social Lending Site Launches
The Guardian — April 22, 2010
"WhipCar launches neighbor-to-neighbor car rental scheme"
The next generation of P2P car sharing launches in the U.K..
GOOD — April 12, 2010
"A Borrower and a Lender Be"
Nice piece on “virtual commune” platform Bright Neighbor.
Archive of All News Items
Spreading CC
Examples of Collaborative Consumption are popping up everyday and everywhere. We have created terms, tools, and icons to help you talk, spread, and share CC. Coming Soon!
The Rise of Collaborative Consumption
Welcome! This is the online hub for Collaborative Consumption — the powerful socioeconomic groundswell that is transforming business, consumerism, and the way we live.
We have created this site to help you contribute to and evolve the ideas in our upcoming book What’s Mine Is Yours: The Rise of Collaborative Consumption, (Harper Business, September 28, 2010).
Collaborative Consumption describes the rapid explosion in traditional sharing, bartering, lending, trading, renting, gifting, and swapping redefined through technology and peer communities.
From enormous marketplaces such as eBay and Craigslist, to emerging sectors such as social lending (Zopa) and car sharing (Zipcar), Collaborative Consumption is disrupting outdated modes of business and reinventing not just what we consume but how we consume. New marketplaces such as Swaptree, Zilok, Bartercard, AirBnb, and thredUP are enabling "peer-to-peer" to become the default way people exchange—whether it’s unused space, goods, skills, money, or services — and sites like these are appearing everyday, all over the world.
As the Collaborative Consumption movement grows and evolves, so will this online hub. We believe in well-designed, simple tools that people can openly share and build on. Over the next few months we will provide you with resources, stories, info-graphics, and tools to fuel the development of Collaborative Consumption and create the forums for you to discuss and spread your ideas.
Stay connected with us on Twitter and sign up for our mailing list for all the latest updates!
Enjoy,
Rachel & Roo
Early Buzz
“At a moment of general gloom, Rachel Botsman and Roo Rogers have offered a convincing, charming and in every sense collaborative account of how the new networks that have disrupted our lives are also likely to alter them, and entirely for our good. They offer not just a prescription for parts of our ailing economy, but a new vision of what ‘consumerism’ can be: not just a form of slavery to objects, but a thing in itself positive, progressive and pleasure-giving.”
— Adam Gopnik, author of Paris to the Moon and Through the Children's Gate
“People are normally trustworthy and generous, and the Internet brings the good out far more than the bad. That’s the big observation from my day job, customer service, for fifteen years. We’re seeing an explosion of modest businesses where people help each other out via the Net, and What’s Mine is Yours tells you what’s going on, and inspires more of the same.”
— Craig Newmark, Founder of Craigslist
What's Mine is Yours, Book Cover Book cover Design: Nicholas Blechman of Knickerbocker Design
Pre-Order. In stores September 28, 2010 Buy from AmazonBuy from Borders
Buy from Barnes & NobleBuy from 800CEORead
Join Our Mailing List
Or
Upcoming Events
Rachel will be speaking at Creative Sydney, at the Museum of Contemporary Art in Sydney, Australia on June 5th, 2010
Technology + Behaviors
What’s Mine is Yours: How are new models of peer-to-peer trading and the economy of shared ownership changing consumerism? MORE
Collaborative Consumption in the News
Fast Company — June 1, 2010
"Zipcar Whizzing Toward an IPO"
Zipcar is going public.
This is Money — May 19, 2010
"New social lending site to rival Zopa"
New P2P Social Lending Site Launches
The Guardian — April 22, 2010
"WhipCar launches neighbor-to-neighbor car rental scheme"
The next generation of P2P car sharing launches in the U.K..
GOOD — April 12, 2010
"A Borrower and a Lender Be"
Nice piece on “virtual commune” platform Bright Neighbor.
Archive of All News Items
Spreading CC
Examples of Collaborative Consumption are popping up everyday and everywhere. We have created terms, tools, and icons to help you talk, spread, and share CC. Coming Soon!
The Rise of Collaborative Consumption
Welcome! This is the online hub for Collaborative Consumption — the powerful socioeconomic groundswell that is transforming business, consumerism, and the way we live.
We have created this site to help you contribute to and evolve the ideas in our upcoming book What’s Mine Is Yours: The Rise of Collaborative Consumption, (Harper Business, September 28, 2010).
Collaborative Consumption describes the rapid explosion in traditional sharing, bartering, lending, trading, renting, gifting, and swapping redefined through technology and peer communities.
From enormous marketplaces such as eBay and Craigslist, to emerging sectors such as social lending (Zopa) and car sharing (Zipcar), Collaborative Consumption is disrupting outdated modes of business and reinventing not just what we consume but how we consume. New marketplaces such as Swaptree, Zilok, Bartercard, AirBnb, and thredUP are enabling "peer-to-peer" to become the default way people exchange—whether it’s unused space, goods, skills, money, or services — and sites like these are appearing everyday, all over the world.
As the Collaborative Consumption movement grows and evolves, so will this online hub. We believe in well-designed, simple tools that people can openly share and build on. Over the next few months we will provide you with resources, stories, info-graphics, and tools to fuel the development of Collaborative Consumption and create the forums for you to discuss and spread your ideas.
Stay connected with us on Twitter and sign up for our mailing list for all the latest updates!
Enjoy,
Rachel & Roo
Early Buzz
“At a moment of general gloom, Rachel Botsman and Roo Rogers have offered a convincing, charming and in every sense collaborative account of how the new networks that have disrupted our lives are also likely to alter them, and entirely for our good. They offer not just a prescription for parts of our ailing economy, but a new vision of what ‘consumerism’ can be: not just a form of slavery to objects, but a thing in itself positive, progressive and pleasure-giving.”
— Adam Gopnik, author of Paris to the Moon and Through the Children's Gate
“People are normally trustworthy and generous, and the Internet brings the good out far more than the bad. That’s the big observation from my day job, customer service, for fifteen years. We’re seeing an explosion of modest businesses where people help each other out via the Net, and What’s Mine is Yours tells you what’s going on, and inspires more of the same.”
— Craig Newmark, Founder of Craigslist
Providentia: Alzheimer’s disease will cost U.S. $20 trillion over the next 40 years
Providentia: Alzheimer’s disease will cost U.S. $20 trillion over the next 40 years: "- Sent using Google Toolbar"
Alzheimer’s disease will cost U.S. $20 trillion over the next 40 years
A new report released by the Alzheimer's Association indicates that the cumulative costs of caring for people with Alzheimer's Disease from 2010 to 2050 will exceed 20 trillion dollars US at current prices. The report, titled Changing the Trajectory of Alzheimer's Disease: A National Imperative examines the current trajectory of Alzheimer's Disease based on a statistical model developed by the Lewin Group. According to current estimates, the number of Americans with Alzheimer's Disease will likely increase from the current 5.1 million to 13.5 million by 2050. Total care costs, currently at $172 billion by all payers, will soar dramatically in the years to come with Medicare costs alone rising from the current $88 billion to more than 1 trillion dollars in 2050. Nearly half of the projected 13.5 million Alzheimer sufferers will likely be in the severe stage of the disease with intensive, round-the-clock care being needed.
Part of the reason for the estimated rise in Alzheimer's Disease patients stems from the general aging of the total population as well as better health care which lowers the likelihood of seniors dying for non-Alzheimer's related diseases in future. While there is no current treatment to delay or ameliorate Alzheimer's Disease, the report explores the cost saving resulting from hypothetical treatment developments within the next five to ten years. The authors of the report also stress the need for more extensive research into new treatments which is deemed to be extremely cost-effective given the catastrophic alternative.
"The impact of Alzheimer's disease — both in terms of lives affected and costs of care — is staggering. As government leaders contend with the best approaches to rein in Medicare and Medicaid costs, we know Alzheimer's will place a massive strain on an already overburdened healthcare system," said Robert J. Egge, vice president of public policy for the Alzheimer's Association. "This report highlights that while we strive for the ideal — a treatment that completely prevents or cures Alzheimer's disease — even more modest, disease-modifying treatments would provide substantial benefits to families and contribute to the solvency of Medicare and Medicaid." As part of their initiative to encourage critical legislation to address the current shortfall in treatment and research initiatives, legislators have introduced The National Alzheimer's Project Act. Designed to create an Office of the National Alzheimer's Project, the act will spur the development of a national plan for dealing with the Alzheimer's crisis by drawing on resources and experts from different fields across the nation. The act also represents a model for other nations to draw upon to address the crisis that they face in their own health systems as well.
For more information.
To download the report. (PDF format).
Alzheimer’s disease will cost U.S. $20 trillion over the next 40 years
A new report released by the Alzheimer's Association indicates that the cumulative costs of caring for people with Alzheimer's Disease from 2010 to 2050 will exceed 20 trillion dollars US at current prices. The report, titled Changing the Trajectory of Alzheimer's Disease: A National Imperative examines the current trajectory of Alzheimer's Disease based on a statistical model developed by the Lewin Group. According to current estimates, the number of Americans with Alzheimer's Disease will likely increase from the current 5.1 million to 13.5 million by 2050. Total care costs, currently at $172 billion by all payers, will soar dramatically in the years to come with Medicare costs alone rising from the current $88 billion to more than 1 trillion dollars in 2050. Nearly half of the projected 13.5 million Alzheimer sufferers will likely be in the severe stage of the disease with intensive, round-the-clock care being needed.
Part of the reason for the estimated rise in Alzheimer's Disease patients stems from the general aging of the total population as well as better health care which lowers the likelihood of seniors dying for non-Alzheimer's related diseases in future. While there is no current treatment to delay or ameliorate Alzheimer's Disease, the report explores the cost saving resulting from hypothetical treatment developments within the next five to ten years. The authors of the report also stress the need for more extensive research into new treatments which is deemed to be extremely cost-effective given the catastrophic alternative.
"The impact of Alzheimer's disease — both in terms of lives affected and costs of care — is staggering. As government leaders contend with the best approaches to rein in Medicare and Medicaid costs, we know Alzheimer's will place a massive strain on an already overburdened healthcare system," said Robert J. Egge, vice president of public policy for the Alzheimer's Association. "This report highlights that while we strive for the ideal — a treatment that completely prevents or cures Alzheimer's disease — even more modest, disease-modifying treatments would provide substantial benefits to families and contribute to the solvency of Medicare and Medicaid." As part of their initiative to encourage critical legislation to address the current shortfall in treatment and research initiatives, legislators have introduced The National Alzheimer's Project Act. Designed to create an Office of the National Alzheimer's Project, the act will spur the development of a national plan for dealing with the Alzheimer's crisis by drawing on resources and experts from different fields across the nation. The act also represents a model for other nations to draw upon to address the crisis that they face in their own health systems as well.
For more information.
To download the report. (PDF format).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)