Just another example of the legislature giving the Executive branch too much power

Kill SOPA, save America’s Internet and American jobs: ACT NOW, bill goes to the House TOMORROW
[Via Boing Boing]

Tiffiniy from American Censorship sez, “Tomorrow, the US government will vote to have broad powers to block any site. SOPA would not only hurt free speech, it will choke off the internet workforce and its readers by taking down entire websites. Today is the only day we have left to have our voices heard. It’s time to pull all stops – please make a call right now to protest censorship. Your call matters. If you don’t call, SOPA will pass. If there is one call per minute into every one of our representatives, we have a chance of stalling SOPA enough so it dies for quite some time. Please call Congress now and tell them you oppose internet censorship and stifling the internet. If you own a site, you’re in the best position to spread the word. Please post this call widget. If we’re really going to stop SOPA, we need you to get involved. If you write emails or have a blog, or if you post to Facebook, twitter, tumblr, tell everyone by blacking out your text here. It’s super easy. SOPA kills jobs that we need right now and blocks sites to Americans for the purpose of serving copyright in vague and overbroad ways, in ways that are not even well-agreed on by academics in the field. Please help us stop SOPA now.”

[More]

Who in their right mind does not think this will be abused? Like the bill that would allow the President to declare anyone – citizen or not – a terrorist and imprison them anywhere in the world without benefit of habeas, a lawyer or a civil court, this bill provides the ability of the Executive to shut down any site it wants to, simply on its say so, with no real check on that ability.

We have already seen the first timid uses of this sort of approach be misused to take down sites that are completely innocent of any ‘crime’ . What more will happen with a much larger accumulation of power?

Ostensibly to protect the monied interests of important corporations but in reality, a perfect way to centralize power and determine just who gets to discuss what on the Web.

American citizens falsely imprisoned

Immigration Crackdown Also Snares Americans – NYTimes.com
[Via NYT]

A growing number of United States citizens have been detained under Obama administration programs intended to detect illegal immigrants who are arrested by local police officers.

In a spate of recent cases across the country, American citizens have been confined in local jails after federal immigration agents, acting on flawed information from Department of Homeland Security databases, instructed the police to hold them for investigation and possible deportation.

Americans said their vehement protests that they were citizens went unheard by local police officers and jailers for days, with no communication with federal immigration agents to clarify the situation. Any case where an American is held, even briefly, for immigration investigation is a potential wrongful arrest because immigration agents lack legal authority to detain citizens.

[More]

Americans held for up to a year, without trial, in violation of the Bill of Rights. But that is okay.

Computer screw ups due to incomplete databases send people into a Kakaesque world. But that is okay.

They lack the authority to detain American citizens yet do. But that is okay.

Apparently, better for a few American citizens to be held without bail or trial for as long as it takes.

“The facts have a pro-Apple bias”

App Developers Betting on iOS Over Android
[Via Daring Fireball]

Data from Flurry analytics:

Anecdotally, developers consistently tell us that they make more money on iOS, about three to four times as much. To be sure, we pulled a sample of in-app purchase data from a set of top apps with versions on both iOS and Android, comprising of several million daily active users (DAUs). Running the numbers, we find that, on average, for every $1.00 generated on iOS, the same app will generate $0.24 on Android.

The facts have a pro-Apple bias.

[More]

If you want to make some money, sell it on the App store. If you want Google to make money, sell it on the Android Marketplace.

A developer would have to sell over 4 apps on Android to make as much as selling one on iOS.

The graph that tells many truths

Wonkbook: The GOP’s two conversations over taxes
[Via Ezra Klein]

There are two very different tax-policy conversations playing out in the Republican Party right now. In Washington, House Republicans are arguing with each other over how small of a temporary tax cut to give the middle class. Out on the primary trail, the Republican presidential candidates are arguing over how huge of a permanent tax cut to give the wealthy.

 

[More]

Two of the plans increase taxes on the middle class while providing huge tax cuts for the 1%. Newt’s plan would give those Americans an average tax benefit equal to almost 7 years salary of a middle class household.

And none of those tax cuts are paid for. Meanwhile in Washington, the GOP refuses to provide tax cuts for the middle class unless they are paid for.

All of which leaves the Republican Party in an odd place: skeptical of a temporary tax cut for the middle class that carries a price tag in the low hundreds of billions of dollars and is fully paid for but apparently enthused over permanent tax cuts for the rich that cost trillions of dollars and aren’t paid for at all. That can’t poll well.

I would not expect it to poll well in a rational world.


Trying to fund innovative research

Science funding tends to favour mediocrity over grand ideas
[Via Science news, comment and analysis | guardian.co.uk]

It’s a good job Einstein didn’t need a grant

The kind of idle pastime that might amuse physicists is to imagine drafting Einstein’s grant applications in 1905. “I propose to investigate the idea that light travels in little bits,” one might say. “I will explore the possibility that time slows down as things speed up,” goes another. Imagine what comments these would have elicited from reviewers for the German Science Funding Agency, had such a thing existed. Instead, Einstein just did the work anyway while drawing his wages as a technical expert third-class at the Bern patent office. And that is how he invented quantum physics and relativity.

The moral seems to be that really innovative ideas don’t get funded – that the system is set up to exclude them. To wring research money from government agencies, you have to write a proposal that gets assessed by anonymous experts (“peer reviewers”). If its ambitions are too grand or its ideas too unconventional, there is a strong chance it will be trashed. So does the money go only to “safe” proposals that plod down well-trodden avenues, timidly advancing the frontiers of knowledge a few nanometres?

There is some truth in the accusation that grant mechanisms favour mediocrity. After all, your proposal has to specify exactly what you are going to achieve. But how can you know the results before you have done the experiments, unless you are aiming to prove the bleeding obvious?

To address this complaint, the US National Science Foundation has announced a scheme for awarding grants. From next year – if Congress approves – the Creative Research Awards for Transformative Interdisciplinary Ventures (Creativ – oh, I get it) will have $24m (£15.36m) to give to “unusually creative high-risk/high-reward interdisciplinary proposals”. In other words, it is looking for new ideas that might not work, but which would be massive if they do.

[More]

It will be interesting to see what gets funded. Of course, this assumes Congress will actually fund something new.

Since it has failed to pass a new budget by the statutory deadline over the last 2 years, that assumption seems very weak.

How the military-industrial complex deals with a Medal of Honor recipent

Comment: The Case of Dakota Meyer : The New Yorker
[Via The New Yorker]

This is what happened to Dakota Meyer when he was deployed as a Marine in Afghanistan, and what he did about it. His patrol, with two Afghan Army platoons, was headed to a meeting in a village called Ganjgal one day before dawn in September, 2009, when they were ambushed. Four of Meyer’s fellow Marines were stranded; he could hear them on the radio. He was ordered to stay put, but didn’t listen. He rode into the field on the exposed back of a gun truck, under heavy fire, and saved thirty-six soldiers, more than two dozen of them Afghans. When his truck stopped working he found another, and then another. The fifth and final time he went in on foot, and finally made it to the trench where his four friends had been trapped. “I checked them all for a pulse,” he wrote in a handwritten statement for military investigators, obtained by the Marine Corps Times, but the “bodies were already stiff…. I found SSgt Kenefick facedown in the trench w/ his GPS in his hand. His face appeared as if he was screaming. He had been shot in the head.” Meyer, still under fire, got all of their bodies out. He was twenty-one years old.

[More]

What a patriotic act for BAE– selling technology to people who could very well be using it against our troops. And when the Medal of Honor recipient calls them on it, they not only harass him but apparently spread rumors that prevent him from getting employment.

I hope he wins his case. I hope BAE loses not only the case but any ability to send other countries better material than our own soldiers have. I hope he gets a huge settlement but his reputation – a man who is the first living man to receive the Medal of Honor since Vietnam – has forever been tarnished by the motives of an apparent war profiteer.


Because there are some things Americans are not supposed to hear

Once again, I am embarrassed to be an American
[Via Pharyngula]

I have really been looking forward to seeing David Attenborough’s latest, Frozen Planet, here in the US. I’ve seen brief snippets of the show on youtube, and like all of these big BBC nature productions, I’m sure it’s stunning. And then I hear that the Discovery Channel has bought the rights! Hooray!

But wait, experience cautions us. Remember when American television replaced Attenborough’s narration with Sigourney Weaver? And <shudder> Oprah Winfrey? And when the Oprah version dropped the references to evolution? What kind of insane butchery would they perpetrate this time around?

Well, the word is out. The Discovery Channel only bought 6 of the 7 episodes. They dropped the seventh because…it talks about global climate change.

Goddamnit.

[More]

They already destroyed the previous Attenborough series, which is why I bought the BBC versions. They remove science, which is why I bought the BBC versions.

Now our media simply decide not to show an entire episode, which is why I will buy the BBC version.

When people complain about the poor scholarship of our students, they can look directly at the media and culture that surrounds us.

We want a society of barely educated citizens. At least the British are not afraid to hear some inconvenient facts.

 

Another example of OWS techniques being used by authorities

riot policeby hozinja

Police oust Occupy, dozens arrested – Metro – The Boston Globe
[Via The Boston Globe]

Hundreds of Boston police officers swooped down on the Occupy Boston encampment early this morning, arresting dozens of protesters and tearing down tents, bringing an end to the 10-week rally against economic inequality, the longest continual Occupy demonstration in the country.

At least 46 protesters were arrested in the lightning-swift operation, which was over in less than an hour. The vast majority are facing trespassing charges, Boston police spokeswoman Elaine Driscoll said.

“They wanted to get arrested. It went very well, and we’re very happy with this operation,” said Superintendent William Evans.

[More]

Sounds like just another eviction. Until I read this way down in the article:

Police appeared very calm throughout the operation. They wore their normal uniforms, not riot gear. Protesters chanted but offered no resistance. In less than an hour, the square was cleared, the area blocked off by steel barricades and patrolled. Police said they wouldn’t let anyone return for the next 24 hours.

[…]

Superintendent Evans informed the group sitting down just before they were arrested that police wanted to exercise “the least amount of force possible.”

When several of the protesters changed their minds, saying they didn’t want to be arrested, police relented and released them.

[…]

Occupy Boston arrestees arriving at the South End district station could be heard laughing inside their transport van while talking with police who were taking down their identifying information.

They laughed at one point when an officer addressed one arrestee as “the young [man] in the cherry-colored coat.”

This is the same sort of behavior I wrote about regarding the eviction in St. Louis. Simple uniforms. Respectfully asking who wants to be arrested.

The police came not strictly as representatives of authority but as simply other citizens doing their job. They were not faceless people behind riot helmets but people just doing their job.

This shows a strong adaptive response, one that appears to have been learned from other police departments.

Let’s hope this becomes a more permanent response of the police – to lower the threat level tremendously when dealing with people.

This is how you know OWS has had an effect

NewImageby Bruce R

How To Break Up a Peaceful Protest Peacefully
[Via American Times]

The eviction of Occupy St. Louis was surprisingly calm.

Occupy St. Louis was evicted recently, but it didn’t end in blood and tears. No pepper-spray was deployed. No protesters found themselves on the other end of a baton. In fact, if reports are accurate, police in St. Louis decided to opt for wits over brute strength, and common sense over riot gear.

Via Radley Balko, Brad Hicks describes how the eviction of Occupy St. Louis went down:

The first thing they did was the one that baffled me the most, at first: they gave the protesters nearly 36 hours notice, as opposed to the 20 to 60 minutes’ notice other cities gave. It has taken me almost a week, and the mistakes of several other cities, to see why that was a good idea, because here’s how they did it. Early afternoon on Thursday, they gave the protesters 24 hours’ notice: as of 3pm on Friday, the no structures in the plaza rule was going to be enforced, and as of 10pm, the curfew was going to be enforced. So, unsurprisingly, Occupy St. Louis put out a huge call for as many people as possible to come to the plaza by noon, to be trained in peaceful civil disobedience; local civil liberties lawyers showed up to brief them. Needless to say, the cops did not oblige them by showing up at 3pm. Heck, I knew they weren’t going to show up at 3pm; no way were they going to snarl downtown traffic during rush hour; I told my friend not to expect them any earlier than 7pm at the very earliest.

So, when no cops showed up anywhere near 3pm, the protesters had their biggest rally to date (as I suspect the cops were thinking, “getting it out of their system”), and then started to drift away. Rally organizers advised people to be back before 10pm, to block the enforcement of curfew. Sure enough, by 10pm, they had 350 people down there. And scant minutes later, people were jazzed up and ready to go, because outlying scouts reported that the police were gathering, en masse, with multiple cars, multiple buses, an ambulance, and a firetruck, only a couple of blocks away!

And sometime around an hour, hour and a half later, the cops just disappeared, dispersed, without ever having gotten within two blocks of the plaza. So the confused protesters declared victory, let most of the troops go home, and fewer than a hundred of them bedded down for the night in their tents. An hour later, somewhere around 150 cops showed up. I’m sure people in those tents tweeted and text messaged and phoned for reinforcements. But between the late hour, and the fact that people were exhausted after having been out there all day, and that it was the third call-up of the day? Nobody showed.

[More]

So far this is pretty smart. Using the protestor’s own tools against them. Give them plenty of chance to think and organize and then wait.

But the next step was what not only made this brilliant but showed how some of the ideas of the OWS movement can inform authorities.

Ah, but the cops did more than just show up after two head-fakes and with sufficient numbers … they did right exactly what the Obama administration told everybody else to do wrong. They didn’t show up in riot gear and helmets, they showed up in shirt sleeves with their faces showing. They not only didn’t show up with SWAT gear, they showed up with no unusual weapons at all, and what weapons they had all securely holstered. They politely woke everybody up. They politely helped everybody who was willing to remove their property from the park to do so. They then asked, out of the 75 to 100 people down there, how many people were volunteering for being-arrested duty? Given 33 hours to think about it, and 10 hours to sweat it over, only 27 volunteered. As the police already knew, those people’s legal advisers had advised them not to even passively resist, so those 27 people lined up to be peacefully arrested, and were escorted away by a handful of cops. The rest were advised to please continue to protest, over there on the sidewalk … and what happened next was the most absolutely brilliant piece of crowd control policing I have heard of in my entire lifetime.

All of the cops who weren’t busy transporting and processing the voluntary arrestees lined up, blocking the stairs down into the plaza. They stood shoulder to shoulder. They kept calm and silent. They positioned the weapons on their belts out of sight. They crossed their hands low in front of them, in exactly the least provocative posture known to man. And they peacefully, silently, respectfully occupied the plaza, using exactly the same non-violent resistance techniques that the protesters themselves had been trained in.

No military outfits. No SWAT. No us-vs-them show of force. They showed up as normal people – looking every bit the 99% that the OWS has kept telling the police they are.

Respectful and encouraging, they were just guys doing their job, as best as they knew how. They had used their knowledge of the movement and people involved to the best advantage for everyone.

And the idea that they used the same non-violent techniques to occupy the plaza to prevent further OWS occupation makes this a tremendous story.

Because this eviction was not a pure demonstration of power by authorities over protesting citizens, as it has been almost everywhere else. Most of the purpose for the occupation is to provoke just the sorts of images we have seen – because they often go directly to the unfairness of the system when it (ab)uses force.

Here, we have citizens asking other citizens to leave, treating both with respect. Now the shoe is on the other foot. If any protestor did anything to hurt an officer, the protestors would be the ones in the wrong. The entire focus of the movement was put on its head.

The protestors demonstrated their attachment to their principles by calmly being arrested or moving.

But to accomplish this, the authorities had to change their behavior. They had to learn to do something different because this movement is, in many ways, designed to screw up the previous training of the authorities.

They basically had to trust that the protestors would act the way that they had said they would – peacefully and passively.

This change in behavior is actually one I would expect many in the OWS movement to applaud. Even if it brilliantly dissipates much of their momentum.

Because it demonstrates an adaptability that is, I think, inherent in eventually combating many of our problems. OWS will adapt to these techniques and the best authorities will adapt also.

To my mind, the creation of public communities that learn to adapt could be a huge milestone for the OWS movement. Adaptation and resilience will be key to surviving our problems. The faster the authorities become inculcated with this idea, the better we will all be.

My psychic powers drink your milkshake!

ESP proponents claim that ESP skeptics are psychic, and use their powers to suppress ESP
[Via Boing Boing]

Clay sez, “Stuart Ritchie, a psychology doctoral student in Edinburgh, worked with two colleagues to try to replicate the results of a famous recent experiment, claiming people could predict in advance whether they were about to be shown erotic images. When the three failed to find any such evidence for ESP they sent their results out for publication, and the British Psychology Journal, one of the journals to which it was sent, in turn sent the trio’s article out for review. When Ritchie et al got the responses back ‘…there were two reviews, one very positive, urging publication, and one quite negative. This latter review didn’t find any problems in our methodology or writeup itself, but suggested that, since the three of us (Richard Wiseman, Chris French and I) are all skeptical of ESP, we might have unconsciously influenced the results using our own psychic powers.’ They are still looking for a place to publish their findings

Anyway, the BJP editor agreed with the second reviewer, and said that he’d only accept our paper if we ran a fourth experiment where we got a believer to run all the participants, to control for these experimenter effects. We thought that was a bit silly, and said that to the editor, but he didn’t change his mind. Wethink doing another replication with a believer at the helm is the right thing to do, for the reason above, and for the reason that Bem had stated in his original paper that his experimental paradigms were designed so that most of the work is done by a computer and the experimenter has very little to do (this was explicitly because of his concerns about possible experimenter effects). So, after this very long and unproductive delay, we’re off to another journal to try again. How frustrating.

[More]

I weep.

Will the Supreme Court decide to screw us?

Oblivious Supreme Court poised to legalize medical patents
[Via Ars Technica]

The Supreme Court on Wednesday heard oral arguments in a case that raises a fundamental question: whether a physician can infringe a patent merely by using scientific research to inform her treatment decisions.

Unfortunately, this issue was barely mentioned in Wednesday’s arguments. A number of influential organizations had filed briefs warning of the dire consequences of allowing medical patents, but their arguments were largely ignored in the courtroom. Instead, everyone seemed to agree that medical patents were legal in general, and focused on the narrow question of whether the specific patent in the case was overly broad.

[More]

Most likely. These sorts of patents could damage medicine about as much as software patents have damaged the computer industry.

But you can be sure that this Supreme Court will do whatever helps business, no matter the cost to people.

The Civil War from another perspective

NewImageby chadh

The Civil War Isn’t Tragic
[Via Ta-Nehisi Coates : The Atlantic]

We fought for months over this. Here is the result:

In our present time, to express the view of the enslaved–to say that the Civil War was a significant battle in the long war against bondage and for government by the people–is to compromise the comfortable narrative. It is to remind us that some of our own forefathers once explicitly rejected the republic to which they’d pledged themselves, and dreamed up another country, with slavery not merely as a bug, but as its very premise. It is to point out that at this late hour, the totems of the empire of slavery–chief among them, its flag–still enjoy an honored place in the homes, and public spaces, of self-professed patriots and vulgar lovers of “freedom.” It is to understand what it means to live in a country that will never apologize for slavery, but will not stop apologizing for the Civil War.
In August, I returned to Gettys­­burg. My visits to battlefields are always unsettling. Repeatedly, I have dragged my family along, and upon arrival I generally wish that I hadn’t. Nowhere, as a black person, do I feel myself more of a problem than at these places, premised, to varying degrees, on talking around me. But of all the Civil War battlefields I’ve visited, Gettys­burg now seems the most honest and forward-­looking. The film in the visitor center begins with slavery, putting it at the center of the conflict. And in recent years, the National Park Service has made an effort to recognize an understated historical element of the town–its community of free blacks.
The Confederate army, during its march into Pennsylvania, routinely kidnapped blacks and sold them south. By the time Lee’s legions arrived in Gettys­burg, virtually all of the town’s free blacks had hidden or fled. On the morning of July 3, General George Pickett’s division prepared for its legendary charge. Nearby, where the Union forces were gathered, lived Abraham Brien, a free black farmer who rented out a house on his property to Mag Palmer and her family. One evening before the war, two slave-catchers had fallen upon Palmer as she made her way home. (After the passage of the Fugitive Slave Act, slave-catchers patrolled the North, making little distinction between freeborn blacks and runaways.) They bound her hands, but with help from a passerby, she fought them off, biting off a thumb of one of the hunters.
Faulkner famously wrote of Pickett’s Charge:
For every Southern boy fourteen years old, not once but whenever he wants it, there is the instant when it’s still not yet two o’clock on that July afternoon in 1863 … and it’s all in the balance, it hasn’t happened yet, it hasn’t even begun yet … That moment doesn’t need even a fourteen-year-old boy to think This time.
These “Southern boys,” like Catton’s “people,” are all white. But I, standing on Brien’s property, standing where Mag Palmer lived, saw Pickett’s soldiers charging through history, in wild pursuit of their strange birthright–the license to beat and shackle women under the cover of night. That is all of what was “in the balance,” the nostalgic moment’s corrupt and unspeakable core.
This is the conclusion of a really incredible debate. I doubt that I will convince all of you. But I love you guys nonetheless. It was fighting and grappling with you that gave me this. I hope you enjoy. More on this in the coming hours and days.
See the escalation of this long argument hereherehereherehere, and here.

[More]

I enjoy good writing, even if I do not always agree with the author. But TNC , in this work and in his linked discussions leading up to it, provides an important view often left out of much of the mainstream discussion of the Civil War.

He has become  a Civil War buff – as is my Dad – and his descriptions of visiting the battlefields is similar to the experience my father has described. He has read many of the same histories I have. So we have a point where we can connect.

And he just about has me convinced – celebrating the  Civil War as a victory and not as as tragedy should be something we do not shrink from. It should be a recognition that it does represent, at its core, the ideals of the Enlightenment brought to devastating fruition. These were not just idle theories about how cultures and societies should organize themselves.

We fought one bloody Civil War in the late 18th Century to begin the creation of an Enlightenment society. We fought an even bigger and bloodier war in the mid 19th century bring that Enlightenment society to full birth.

And the consequence of following Enlightenment principles is that EVERYONE’s life gets better – not just a chosen few. Because they change a zero sum game – one that has been played by feudal states and monarchies –  into a positive sum game – one played by democracies and republics. And these societies simply prosper compared to the alternative, as they make full use of all of their citizens, not just a chosen few.

The years before the Civil War are rife with battles back and forth trying to deal with these ideals, in a society that very obviously did not follow them. If we think things are difficult today, read any good history – as with TNC, I recommend McPherson’s Battle Cry of Freedom, the best single volume history of the times.

We essentially had a police state throughout most of the country, there was open rebellion with free citizens in the North who happened to be black being kidnapped and sold as slaves in the South, while others from the North working to help slaves escape. There were compromises which bartered people’s lives for political favors. They were really horrible times.

Because we really could not live by the very principles we espoused. We really were psychotic and this became a large part of our culture. Yes, it would have been cheaper – in both money and lives – for the North to simply have bought all the South’s slaves and emancipated them. And as I wrote earlier “But hard numbers have a difficult time with many worldviews, particularly the one espoused by Keziah Goodwyn Hopkins Brevard. The slaves made her wealthy. Secession would maintain that wealth. How wrong she was.”

TNC provides some great reasons why we should celebrate the millions of people who were set free by the War. He quotes from some of the same material I have to show just how unjust and un-Enlightened so many were during that time – from the Cornerstone Speech to Succession declarations – to arrive at this:

It’s really simple for me. One group of Americans attempted to raise a country on property in Negroes. Another group of Americans, many of them Negroes themselves, stopped them. As surely as we lack the ability to see tragedy in violently throwing off the yoke of the English, I lack the ability to see tragedy in violently throwing off the yoke of slaveholders.

We should celebrate what we have been able to become because we fought the War.

We fought one of the most brutal wars in history in order to make these Enlightenment principles manifest throughout our country. We demonstrated that, even if the economics demanded it, a slave society could not stand. We demonstrated that, even if the politics demanded it, a slave society could not stand. We demonstrated that, even if a large percentage of Americans demanded it, a slave state could not stand.

Because the very basis of our country – the very Enlightenment principles hardcoded into our Constitution, our Declaration of Independence, the Federalist Papers, etc. – demanded that a slave society could not stand.

By ridding ourselves of a slave society, we opened ourselves to fully embodying the Enlightenment principles we strive to match today. It would not be an easy or even march forward. But we, and the world, are the better for it.

It is a great thing we did.


Photos that bring tears – of sorrow and joy.

2011: The Year in Photos, Part 1 of 3 – Alan Taylor – In Focus – The Atlantic
[Via The Atlantic]

2011 was a year of global tumult, marked by widespread social and political uprisings, economic crises, and a great deal more. We saw the fall of multiple dictators, welcomed a new country (South Sudan), witnessed our planet’s population grow to 7 billion, and watched in horror as Japan was struck by a devastating earthquake, a tsunami, and a nuclear disaster. From the Arab Spring to Los Indignados to Occupy Wall Street, citizens around the world took to the streets in massive numbers, protesting against governments and financial institutions, risking arrest, injury, and in some cases their lives. Collected here is Part 1 of a three-part photo summary of the last year, covering 2011′s first several months. Part 2 is now live, and Part 3 of the series will go up tomorrow – totaling 120 images in all. [40 photos + 1 more]

[More]

With so many cameras available today, it seems as though it is a photojournalism’s dream.Many of these are simply unforgettable. As they should be.

Mythbusters in trouble

Mythbusters Crew Accidentally Fire Cannonball Through Suburban Neighborhood… Quickly Start Deleting Tweets Of The Evidence
[Via Techdirt]

Well, well. Slashdot points us to this bizarre and slightly scary story about how everyone’s favorite TV show, MythBusters, had an experiment that went really, really wrong yesterday. Apparently, it fired a home-made cannon at the Alameda County Sheriff’s Department bomb disposal range. The idea was to shoot the cannonball into huge water containers.

But they missed.

Instead, the cannonball went hurtling through the suburban northern California town of Dublin, at 4:15, just as kids were getting home from school. According to the SF Chronicle report on this:

The cantaloupe-sized cannonball missed the water, tore through a cinder-block wall, skipped off a hillside and flew some 700 yards east, right into the Tassajara Creek neighborhood, where children were returning home from school at 4:15 p.m., authorities said.

There, the 6-inch projectile bounced in front of a home on quiet Cassata Place, ripped through the front door, raced up the stairs and blasted through a bedroom, where a man, woman and child slept through it all – only awakening because of plaster dust.

The ball wasn’t done bouncing.

It exited the house, leaving a perfectly round hole in the stucco, crossed six-lane Tassajara Road, took out several tiles from the roof of a home on Bellevue Circle and finally slammed into the Gill family’s beige Toyota Sienna minivan in a driveway on Springvale Drive.

[More]

This is a pretty scary accident. The original article has a video report.

The cannon ball traveled quite some distance. Very lucky no one was hurt but I imagine they will be rethinking living next to such a facility.

Here is another video report.

Dealing with disruptive technologies from within

[Crossposted at SpreadingScience]

disruptby aroid

How Autodesk Disrupted Itself with an App – Technology Review
[Via Technology Review]

When Chris Cheung and Thomas Heermann, two middle managers at the software company Autodesk, first showed off their new iPhone drawing app, they got some skeptical looks. Why would anyone want to doodle on that tiny screen? And what could a $2.99 app matter to a company with around $2 billion in annual revenue?

[More]

This is a great example of how the app economy changes things and how adaptive companies deal with that change,

Two middle managers, charged with working on one project, are able to see the possible impact of new technology on their products. The app economy allowed them to bootstrap themselves without much investment of time, resources, or even permission from the company.

The products their small group created were big hits. The managers hoped for 100,000 downloads in a year. They got one million in 50 days.

These sorts of numbers are disruptive and mind boggling to a company with revenues in the billions. In fact, their entire PC-driven business could disappear in a few years due to this sort of economy – one where new competitors can arise so fast.

But Autodesk essentially competed with itself, now knows what is needed and could expand rapidly into this new niche.

Heermann thinks the timing of the apps may prove critical because consumer-style products are beginning to gain popularity among the corporate workforce, a phenomenon known as consumerization. That shift could spell trouble for companies that are slow to adapt. Now that Autodesk is a top-ranked app seller, says Heerman, who is now the company’s director of consumer products, “it’s almost like having the company shape up and get ready for the future.”

Disruptive technologies always start small and in niche areas. #12 million is small potatoes to a billion dollar company. But that small amount can grow and is Autodesk is snot adaptive enough, could eventually destroy Autodesk”s value.

Now, however, the disruption is happening inside and Autodesk might be resilient enough to capitalize.

Because one thing that disruptive technologies do – they destroy business models.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 166 other followers