Tuesday, March 22, 2005

What's Up with Google's AdSense?



Click here for AmazonThere's something odd going on with Google's AdSense service. And I mean odd in a good way, I think. Here's the mystery: I use Google to serve up ads on various of my web sites, this blog included. Google's AdSense produces the context-sensitive textual ads that you see on the right sidebar, for instance.

I've been using AdSense for quite some time -- since August of '03, really -- and have served up over 6 million impressions. My click-through rate -- meaning the percentage of ads that actually get clicked upon -- however, has historically been quite low. Lower than a bathysphere submerged in the Marianas Trench. Therefore, the earnings generated through AdSense, despite the number of impressions, has been relatively tiny: less than $1,000 since inception.

But starting in early March of this year, I noticed something odd occurring: my click-through rates were up... every day. Dramatically. Here's March, so you can get a feel for the difference. Instead of averaging, say, a dollar a day, the March daily average is nearly three bucks. What's weird? The number of impressions hasn't changed a bit.

So... what has changed? Are the ads getting better -- more 'contextually correct' than before? I don't know. But I'm not going to complain.

Takeaway: while one can't predict the future, if my results are indicative of AdSense overall, then Google's earnings are going to kick some serious butt this quarter. Act accordingly.

Tuesday, March 1, 2005 16,586 3 0.0% $0.04 $0.73
Wednesday, March 2, 2005 20,172 4 0.0% $0.03 $0.65
Thursday, March 3, 2005 19,448 8 0.0% $0.10 $1.93
Friday, March 4, 2005 15,098 13 0.1% $0.12 $1.86
Saturday, March 5, 2005 17,663 24 0.1% $0.22 $3.89
Sunday, March 6, 2005 17,861 30 0.2% $0.30 $5.38
Monday, March 7, 2005 17,915 25 0.1% $0.21 $3.79
Tuesday, March 8, 2005 17,508 24 0.1% $0.19 $3.26
Wednesday, March 9, 2005 15,965 13 0.1% $0.12 $1.88
Thursday, March 10, 2005 15,185 43 0.3% $0.34 $5.10
Friday, March 11, 2005 15,670 21 0.1% $0.15 $2.37
Saturday, March 12, 2005 13,857 18 0.1% $0.13 $1.77
Sunday, March 13, 2005 16,461 23 0.1% $0.17 $2.73
Monday, March 14, 2005 16,712 18 0.1% $0.17 $2.78
Tuesday, March 15, 2005 18,376 13 0.1% $0.06 $1.09
Wednesday, March 16, 2005 15,847 22 0.1% $0.17 $2.69
Thursday, March 17, 2005 14,477 18 0.1% $0.13 $1.87
Friday, March 18, 2005 14,554 39 0.3% $0.23 $3.35
Saturday, March 19, 2005 15,470 17 0.1% $0.22 $3.38
Sunday, March 20, 2005 13,545 16 0.1% $0.15 $2.06
Monday, March 21, 2005 14,876 21 0.1% $0.23 $3.46
Tuesday, March 22, 2005 13,681 21 0.2% $0.22 $3.00
Totals 356,927 434 0.1% $0.17 $59.02
Averages 16,223 19 $2.68

 

Reuters: "Hitler Was Personally Behind Holocaust, Book Says"



Click here for AmazonHere's a headline worthy of Al-Reuters: "Hitler Was Personally Behind Holocaust, Book Says" (hat tip: Best of the Web). Gosh, and all this time, I thought Hitler actually disapproved of the slaughter and carnage! If only his evil henchmen hadn't violated his strict orders not to harm anyone, perhaps the Holocaust and the millions of other deaths during World War II would never have happened!

Al Reuters reports upon the revelation that Joseph Stalin, the Soviet Leader, took two of Hitler's closest attaches prisoner at the conclusion of the war. Based upon their interrogations, the KGB created a 'briefing book' detailing a psychological profile of Hitler. Two German historians unsealed "The Hitler Book" in Russian archives, which documents Hitler's rise to power through his final hours in the Berlin bunker. Of course, don't bother with Al Reuters' coverage: go directly to The London Sunday Times.

Here are some salient points culled from multiple articles.

THE bride wore a dark blue silk dress with a soft grey fur cape; the ashen-faced groom was dressed in the same crumpled jacket that he had been wearing for days, his Iron Cross First Class and other military decorations pinned to the lapel.

The ceremony, held in a storeroom in a Berlin bunker as Soviet artillery rained down on the city, lasted only 10 minutes. When the couple emerged, Adolf Hitler kissed Eva Braun’s hand. There was speculation among aides that she was already carrying the Führer’s child.

Within 24 hours the couple were dead — Hitler from a single bullet to the temple, his wife from biting on a cyanide capsule...

The portrait that emerges is far more complex than the conventional one-dimensional depiction of a monster. Hitler, it seems, personally ordered those who crossed him, even over minor matters, to be sent to concentration camps but also had a wicked sense of humour, frequently mocking the pomposity of Hermann Goering, his number two.

He was also fanatically devoted to his dog, Blondie.

Among the episodes illuminated by the book is the flight of Rudolf Hess, Hitler’s party deputy, on a doomed mission to Britain in May 1941 to try to instigate peace talks. Hitler’s immediate reaction was to conclude he must be mentally ill.

Deeply embarrassed by the affair, he ordered the arrest of Karl Heinz Pintsch, Hess’s adjutant, who had known of the mission. “This shows beyond doubt that Hitler had no prior knowledge of Hess’s trip,” said Uhl.

The book also reveals Hitler’s personal interest in the workings of the concentration and extermination camps. Linge and Günsche claimed that he had pored over the first blueprints of gas chambers and ordered more funding for the project.

When Nazi troops were forced to retreat before the advancing Soviet armies, he also ordered gas chambers contained in camouflaged lorries to be sent to the front to execute prisoners of war and partisans.

The description of Hitler’s mental and physical degeneration during the war is one of the most powerful elements. Germany’s defeat at Stalingrad in February 1943 proved an especially heavy blow to him.

Theodor Morell, Hitler’s personal physician, treated him every second morning after breakfast with “stimulating injections”. Linge used to hand him opium. Hitler’s right eye also began to hurt so badly that the only way to ease the pain was to rub cocaine in it.

He became increasingly paranoid that people were trying to poison him, demanding analysis of his soap, shaving cream and toothpaste. Even the water in which his food was cooked had to be examined.

By the spring of 1945 it became clear that defeat was unavoidable and hopes of a successful German counter-attack against the Soviet forces were futile.

On April 25 Linge was summoned by Hitler, who informed him that he and Braun were to commit suicide. “Get hold of some petrol to tip over our bodies and burn them,” he said. “Under no circumstances must you allow my corpse to fall into the hands of the Russians. They would love to bring me to Moscow and put me on show.”

When Braun emerged after the wedding ceremony, Linge was struck by how pale she looked. “Good luck,” she told the butler. “I hope you manage to get out of Berlin.”

The book does not address directly the question of whether Braun was pregant. But in its conclusion the historians claim that Hitler’s pilot, Hans Baur, who was captured with the others, confided to a cellmate who was spying for the Russians that she had been carrying a child.

Uhl said the evidence was inconclusive. “We know that the autopsy on Eva Braun’s remains was simply not adequate because of the situation and shortage of medical equipment,” he said. “It’s certainly possible that they failed to detect the unborn foetus.”

By the early hours of April 30 both Hitler and Braun were dead. Alerted by the smell of gunpowder just before 4am, Linge accompanied Martin Bormann, one of the leading Nazis, into Hitler’s office. The Führer was sitting on the sofa. He had a tiny, coin shaped wound on his right temple and two flecks of blood on his cheeks.

There was another pool of blood the size of a dinner plate on the carpet and more spatters on the sofa and walls. On the floor were two Walther pistols, one by each foot.

Braun was seated beside him with her legs drawn up. Her high-heeled shoes were on the carpet. Her lips were pressed together in a final spasm.

***

Hitler also had a strange sense of humour.

He allowed German soldiers in occupied countries to marry local women, but only after he saw photographs of the women.

"Most of the women in the pictures were not especially pretty," the book said. "Hitler laughed and said once the soldiers who fell in love with these women sobered up again they would curse him for allowing them to marry."

The book quotes the two aides saying Hitler mocked the United States when it declared war in December 1941.

"He said their cars never win races, American planes look sharp but their engines are worthless ... He said they hadn't proven anything -- just mediocrity and advertising."

***

Hitler was sceptical of Hermann Goering, his bombastic air force chief, and his claims to be able to win the war. Stalin noted an anecdote on page 276 of his paperwork where Hitler allegedly said after the Battle of Britain: "If the Luftwaffe can’t fly anymore then at least we can use his men to fight on the ground."

Günsche and Linge said that far from being in the background, Hitler’s mistress Eva Braun was at the epicentre of Nazi politics for most of the 12-year lifespan of the Third Reich.

One passage, concerning 1936, reads: "He was always accompanied by her. As soon as he heard the voice of his lover he became jollier. He would make jokes about her new hats. He would take her for hours on end into his study where there would be champagne cooling in ice, chocolates, cognac and fruit."

But when Hitler burned the midnight oil speaking with his Nazi underlings or his generals, "Eva would often be in tears".

"She felt a bird in a golden cage, her life unfulfilled as his bed partner," they said.

Linge said that Hitler once ordered a doubling of the police guard on Braun’s Munich villa before the war, after she told the Gestapo that a woman had called her the "Führer-whore".

Stalin, who ordered Hitler’s skull to be brought to Moscow after Red Army troops found his and Braun’s bodies in the ruins of the Reich Chancellery in 1945, was obsessed with the minutiae of Hitler’s daily life.

He wanted to know in particular about routine at the Berghof, Hitler’s mountain home in Bavaria. Linge told him: "Hitler’s conversation there was banal. At the dinner table he would praise the dresses of the female staff, say how difficult they must find it not being able to get their hair done or their nails filed on the mountain.

"Hitler had a weird sense of humour. He would laugh at Eva’s lipstick on a serviette and then say: ‘Soon we will have replacement lipstick made from dead bodies of soldiers’."

The book contains details about how his SS guards were detailed to buy him presents, how his dark moods were uplifted by photos in magazines of the early days of Nazism, and how he sat under the portrait of Frederick the Great, which he carted with him everywhere, believing he would give him divine inspiration to win the war.

Günsche reported how Hitler once flew into a frenzy with his secretary, Martin Bormann, because Braun wanted to hire ten more serving girls over the 30-strong complement laid down by him for the kitchens.

"I stamp whole divisions into the dirt!" screamed Hitler. "And I can’t get a few more serving wenches for the Berghof? Organise it now!"

***

"Hitler told Himmler to use more trucks with mobile gas chambers so that munition needed for the troops wouldn't be wasted on shooting Russian (prisoners)," the book reads.

"Himmler reported that the mobile gas chambers were working. He laughed cynically when he said that this method of murder is 'more considerate' and 'quieter' than shooting them," it adds.

***

Adolf Hitler was so crippled with anxiety during his final days that he would scratch his neck and ears until they bled and demanded that his toilet water, as well as the water in which his eggs were boiled, be constantly analysed for traces of poison.

***

The book is giving Germans a rare glimpse of the dictator, who is still presented in schools and public discussion as either mad or bad or both. Perhaps the most disconcerting revelation of the extracts in Bild is that Hitler had a sense of humour, albeit a particularly cold one. After an evening of small-talk and wise-cracking, Hitler told his guests: “The English believe that I’m sitting or cowering in the Chancellery, guarded by a fierce bulldog.” The truth, he said, was that he was having a good time. “It’s good that they can’t see me now. The Chancellery should be renamed the Happy Chancellor Restaurant.”

The comments, reported by Günsche, came after an evening of concentration camp jokes that had his guests rolling with laughter. Heinrich Hoffmann, Hitler’s court photographer, had turned up drunk. The photographer, Hitler said, should not stand too close to the stove lest the alcoholic fumes from his breath catch fire.

On another occasion, Joseph Goebbels, the Propaganda Minister, told Hitler the latest scurrilous rumour: that the immensely vain Hermann Goering, head of the air force, went to bed wearing medals on his pyjamas. “Hitler liked the story so much,” one Bild extract says, “that he ordered Hoffmann to make some medals out of gold and silver foil as well as a bombastic citation for bravery to be presented to Goering.”

***

The butler’s testimony shows that Hitler was unable to form proper emotional relationships. His closest companion was his dog. They ate together frequently. When Blondi fell ill, Hitler had a special ration of eggs, lean meat and dripping sent. He received regular medical bulletins about the dog. “It was easier for him to sign a death warrant for an officer on the front than to swallow bad news about the health of his dog,” Linge said...

Hitler decided to mate his beloved Alsatian dog, Blondi, and summoned a breeder to bring a pedigree male. Hitler asked his butler, after emerging from a briefing about the Eastern front, whether his dog had copulated. “Yes, my Führer, the Act of State has been completed,” Heinz Linge said with heavy humour.

“How did Blondi take it?”

“They both behaved like beginners.”

“How do you mean?” Hitler was genuinely curious.

“They both fell down.” Hitler burst into laughter

***

The file suggests Hitler wasn't in charge of German strategy in the last days of the war, Eberle said.

Hitler ``wasn't the engine of warfare by the time the fighting had reached Berlin,'' Eberle said.

The accounts also show Hitler was personally interested in the development of the gas chambers that were used to kill about 6 million Jews from across Europe, Eberle said.

He ``studied in-depth development projects that were presented to him by Himmler,'' Eberle read from the book, referring to Heinrich Himmler, who was in charge of the deportation and murder of the Jews.

There was only one copy of the file made in 1965 and put in another Soviet archive, where Uhl and Eberle said they found it.


Google News Search: Uhl Hitler
 

Monday, March 21, 2005

Mad Typing Skillz



Click here for AmazonHow important is typing ability to a developer? I've always had a gut feel that it's quite important. It's important enough to ask the question, "How fast do you type?" in an interview. Because, in my opinion, the productivity of a developer who types via hunt -and-peck will suffer, no matter how smart they may be.

Consider the "fail fast" philosophy: it touts the importance of trying many approaches, knowing most will fail. Discovering which algorithms suck and which meet the challenge is important... and the rate at which you can make these discoveries is likewise key.

Thus, developers who succeed by "failing fast" are quite valuable.

When I was in high school, there was a "typing class" that was a standard part of the curriculum. Ostensibly the class was for would-be government employees, because the civil-service exam had a minimum typing speed requirement. I don't recall the rationale for my taking this class, but it turned out to be a great decision. Little did I know I'd be a developer someday and would need to hit top speeds on the keyboard.

Most years, a female would take the fastest speed honors in the class.

But in our class, a guy named Chuck Thornton and myself were always the top two. We had some brutal typing contests. Remember, this was the day and age of mechanical typewriters (not quite as antedeluvian as the Underwood pictured at top left, however). We would try and intimidate each other -- and all of the others in the class -- by not only typing as fast as we could but by pounding the crap out of the keyboard. The combination of the staccato, rapid-fire hammering was reminiscent of an assault on a machine-gun nest at Anzio.

My kids are both excellent typists. I suspect it has less to do with genetics or their early exposure to Mavis Beach Teaches Typing for Kids than their chocoholic-level addiction to instant messaging.

Joel on Software: Typing Software
 

Beirut Best-sellers



Click here for AmazonEver wondered what's on the bookshelves in Syrian-controlled Lebanon? Here's your answer, direct from a bookshop in Beirut.
 

Sunday, March 20, 2005

The Genuises at Agence France Presse



Click here for AmazonThe geniuses over at Agence France Presse -- or as I like to call them, the Paris bureau of Al Jazeera -- have decided to sue Google News for a minimum of $17 million. Their claim? That Google's news aggregation service reproduced snippets of AFP's copyrighted photos, headlines and stories without permission.

Attention, AFP management: this lawsuit is almost as sensible as giving your 16-year-old daughter permission to date Mike Tyson.

In fact, if these PHB's had the common sense that God gave a sea otter, they would have dealt with this "problem" (and they must think having traffic directed to their site, free of charge, is a problem) in one of the following ways:

  • Used a robots.txt file to tell the Google search bot ("GoogleBot") the areas of the site not to spider

  • Used a simple web server configuration option to deny access to the GoogleBot

  • Used another simple web server configuration option to deny access to the GoogleBot's IP addresses

  • Or simply have asked Google not to spider their site

  • Any one of these options would have prevented Google News from "stealing" AFP's precious one-sentence story summaries and thumbnail copies of images. But apparently, AFP has decided to invest in their legal department, not niceties such as IT or sensible senior management.

    It reminds me of case, a while back, in which the geniuses at TicketMaster that sued various parties over "deep-linking" -- the practice of linking to content within a site as opposed to the site's main page.

    News flash: don't want someone to deep-link to your site? Hire someone technically savvy enough to configure your web-site to deny deep-linking. Hint: there are these mysterious things called "cookies", or "referer headers", or other tools that can help implement a 'no deep linking' policy.

    Although someone would have to explain to me why you wouldn't want more exposure for your content, more folks linking to it, and therefore more visitors and marketing exposure. Maybe we can ask the rocket scientists at AFP about that sometime.

    PhysOrg: AFP sues Google for news aggregation
     

    Saturday, March 19, 2005

    I Want MTV... Off My TV


    Rebecca Hagelin points us to Brent Bozell and his organization's study of programming content on MTV. Apologies in advance for the graphic (even though it's partially redacted) content.

    ...In 171 hours of MTV programming, PTC analysts found 1,548 sexual scenes containing 3,056 depictions of sex or various forms of nudity and 2,881 verbal sexual references. That means that children watching MTV are viewing an average of 9 sexual scenes per hour with approximately 18 sexual depictions and 17 instances of sexual dialogue or innuendo. To put this in perspective, consider that in its last study of sex on primetime network television, the PTC found an average of only 5.8 instances of sexual content during the 10 o’clock hour -- when only adults are watching.


    For the strong of stomach who want to know more about what comes on in the afternoon just as tweens and teens are getting off the school bus and turning on the tube in America’s largely unsupervised homes, here’s just one example:

    One Bad Trip 3/20/04 2:00 p.m.

    Human-sundae eating competition: Three guys lie on stage; whipped cream is placed on their legs and chests. The three girls each straddle a guy and lick the whipped cream off.

    Nate: “She’s eating whipped cream off some dude’s [bleeped ‘f---ing’] chest right now.”
    Nate: “If she goes anywhere near his junk, she is so wrong.”
    Next, the girls switch places and have whipped cream placed all over them, including a cherry on each breast. Guys straddle them and lick the whipped cream off. The camera zooms in close.
    Nate: “Some dude is about to eat [bleeped ‘s--t’] all over her body.
    Melissa, in a voiceover: “It’s a little bit strange having some random guy lick whipped cream off of me.”


    Then there’s the example of the standard MTV “music” content:

    Pete Pablo - “Freak-a-Leak”
    “How u like it, daddy (the way she do it from the front)?
    How u like it, daddy (the way she do it from the back)?
    How u like it, daddy (then bring it down like that)?

    “And she know why she came here
    And she know where clothes suppose to be (off and over there)
    [Bleeped ‘Sniff a lil’ coke, take a lil’ X, smoke a lil’ weed,’] drink a lil’ bit
    I need a girl I could freak with
    And wanna try [bleeped ‘s--t’] and ain’t scared of a big [bleeped ‘d--k’]
    And love to get her [bleeped ‘p---y’] licked by another [bleeped ‘b---h’]
    Cause I ain’t drunk enough to do that [bleeped ‘s--t’]


    I’ve previously written about how MTV seeks to manipulate America’s children and how broadcast networks are targeting America’s youth. Just thought you might want to know it ain’t getting’ any better.

    And in case you didn’t realize it, MTV is owned by Viacom, the same company that owns CBS (of Janet Jackson’s Super Bowl “wardrobe malfunction” and Rathergate fame.) Surprised?


    Call to Action: Yes, this is the stinking, vermin-infested mindrot being spoon-fed to our kids. Harmful doesn't begin to describe it. What can you do? Call up your cable company or satellite provider... and get MTV off your set. Today.

    Rebecca Hagelin: MTV keeps on rockin'
    Cincinnati Cosmetic Dentist Cincinnati Dentist Blog

    The Gloves are Off: Hillary and Kerry



    Click here for AmazonThe newly minted, neocon-model Hillary Clinton has opened up her bombing campaign on would-be 2008 contender John Kerry*. The first salvos were fired by Ann Lewis, director of communications for Clinton's Political Action Committee.

    The Kerry campaign had "...a different message every two or three weeks,'' [according to] Ann Lewis... saying... Kerry...``kept trying to rationally convince, to put a presidency together, line by line, plan by plan.''
    She said people ``don't vote for plans, they vote for presidents.''


    Boston Herald: Clinton adviser: Kerry ran inconsistent campaign

    * The haughty, French-looking Massachusetts Democrat, who by the way promised 48 days ago to release his military records and has yet to do so.
    Cincinnati Cosmetic Dentist Cincinnati Dentist Blog

    The Gloves are Off: Biden and Kerry



    Click here for AmazonThe forgettable "Slow" Joe Biden, whether on his own behalf -- or as a proxy for Hillary -- weighed in with his own demeaning thoughts on Kerry. This appears to be part of a concerted campaign on the part of the "national-security Democrats" to disenfranchise the anti-war Left bank: the Kennedys, Kerrys, and Pelosis. Will such an approach bring more centrists to the table -- or will it further fragment a party led by the mercurial Howard Dean?

    On October 29th, Biden... heard, on the radio, that Osama bin Laden had issued a videotape in which he belittled Bush and promised to continue to “bleed” America. Biden... worried that Kerry’s reaction might seem tepid or petty. His advice to Kerry throughout the campaign—which, he complained, went unheeded much of the time—was to harden his message...

    “I’m on the phone, I e-mail, I say, ‘John, please, say three things: “How dare bin Laden speak of our President this way.” No. 2, “I know how to deal with preventing another 9/11.” No. 3, “Kill him.”’ Now, that’s harsh. Kerry needed to be harsh. And it was—Jesus Christ.” Here Biden threw up his hands. “He didn’t make any of it. Let’s get it straight. None of it. None of those three points were made.”


    New Yorker: Can the Democrats make themselves look tough?
     

    Friday, March 18, 2005

    How to Justify Information Security Spending



    Click here for AmazonDan Lieberman, writing in Computerworld, has performed yeoman service on a topic near and dear to every CISO's heart: how to justify InfoSec spending to senior management. In interview format, Lieberman asks the reader to answer seven simple questions:

    1. Is your digital asset protection spending driven by regulation?

    2. Are Gartner white papers a key input for purchasing decisions?

    3. Does the information security group work without security win/loss scores?

    4. Does your chief security officer meet three to five vendors each day?

    5. Is your purchasing cycle for a new product longer than six months?

    6. Is your team short on head count, and not implementing new technologies?

    7. Has the chief technology officer never personally sold or installed any of the company's products?

    If you answered yes to four of the seven questions, then you definitely need a business strategy with operational metrics for your information security operation.


    Lieberman asserts that a strategy boils down to three key points:

  • Strategy: have you clearly decided upon a Business Unit security strategy?

  • Metrics: measure results in terms the business can understand and do so in the context of a security process

  • Marketing: reinforce the message with senior management, using in-field experiences


  • Indeed, the stakes are high. Organized crime is actively infiltrating business networks the world over. The cases you hear about -- such as the hackers who came close to ripping off 220 million Pounds from the Japanese bank Sumitomo Mitsui -- likely pale in comparison to those that have evaded detection.

    In fact, we sporadically hear of an isolated case here and there, where hackers were busted in the midst of an exotic scam. But what about the truly elite blackhats, funded by global organized crime?

    Read the whole thing.

    Dan Lieberman: How to Justify Information Security Spending
     

    Iran and Venezuela



    Click here for AmazonThe recent visit that Mullah Khatami paid to Venezuela and Hugo Chavez resulted in some interesting, if not hair-raising, statements. Here's Khatami:

    ...Each country that tries to do its will [or] be independent, is pressured militarily... We have to be strong to strike [back] against others for the aggression of other countries and to defend ourselves from the dangers of those who want to invade us...


    I don't think invasion is the top priority on anyone's list. Stopping the world's foremost state-sponsor of terrorism from acquiring nukes, however, is.

    ...Now it is different than in the last century, when the great powers could have all [technology] exclusively... Maybe they think that our power depends on our military power... maybe they think our power depends on sophisticated weapons and weapons of mass destruction...


    The Mullah's power depends on one thing: brutal repression of their people. When young girls are stoned to death, political prisoners are massacred, the worst of the worst terrorist groups are provided aid and comfort, well, then something needs to be done. And acquisition of nuclear weapons by the Mullahs... will... not... happen.

    Of course, Hugo Chavez had to chime in, harmonizing on the tune of "resisting invasion":

    ...We have to be strong to strike [back] against others for the aggression of other countries and to defend ourselves from the dangers of those who want to invade us...


    Yes, this is the great Chavez, the neo-socialist and friend of Castro, who believes he has been targeted by the U.S. for assassination... just like his good friend Fidel.

    The Bottom Line?

    It all comes down to dependence on foreign oil. Like it or not, oil fuels the economy of the U.S. and, indeed, the world. The Senate's decision to open up a small fraction of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) points to a strategy to begin achieving some measure of independence from the Mullahocracy and the "Socialchavists". Advances in fuel cell technology, hydrogen-based engines, and hybrids will also help us move to a world less dependent upon fossil fuel and the "Axis of Instability" that operates very close to home.
     

    Wednesday, March 16, 2005

    Wolfowitz



    Click here for AmazonI received an email from a friend today with the subject heading Bush must be stupid. It contained only a hyperlink to the news that the President will recommend Paul Wolfowitz to head the World Bank. Wolfowitz, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, has been a primary lightning rod for those opposed to the Administration's national security policies.

    I've never understood the animosity some have for Wolfowitz. Certainly he bears responsibility for failed predictions... underestimating the cost of the war in Iraq, for instance. But now, as the world around us changes, due in no small part to his steadfast vision of a democratic Middle East, it is worth considering where his vision led us.

    Last week, the New York Times's David Brooks gave us a glimpse at what may end up being Wolfowitz's legacy:

    ...with political earthquakes now shaking the Arab world, it's time to step back and observe that over the course of his long career - in the Philippines, in Indonesia, in Central and Eastern Europe, and now in the Middle East - Wolfowitz has always been an ardent champion of freedom...

    ...If the trends of the last few months continue, Wolfowitz will be the subject of fascinating biographies decades from now, while many of his smuggest critics will be forgotten. Those biographies will mention not only his intellectual commitment but also his personal commitment, his years spent learning the languages of the places that concerned him, and the thousands of hours spent listening deferentially to the local heroes who led the causes he supported...

    ...To praise Wolfowitz is not triumphalism... It's a recognition that amid all the legitimate criticism, this guy has been the subject of a vicious piling-on campaign by people who know less than nothing about what is actually going on in the government, while he, in the core belief that has energized his work, may turn out to be right.

    ...When he was ambassador to Indonesia, Wolfowitz gave a speech calling for political "openness." He was careful not to use the words "freedom" or "democracy" because under Suharto, Indonesians might have felt inhibited about talking in such bold terms. But they were comfortable with openness, and it became the subject of magazine cover stories and a great national discussion...


    As far back as 2002, The Economist gazed at Wolfowitz and saw a "velociraptor": a man so far beyond being a hawk that he scared those enamored with the "realpolitik" viewpoint of accepting the status quo.

    ...But the most important reason [for his influence] is that history has moved in his direction. Mr Wolfowitz has been arguing for years that the world is a far more dangerous place than most people realise; that America needs to increase its military expenditure; and that the best form of defence is offence. September 11th may not have proved him right in every detail. There may be no connection between Saddam Hussein and the September 11th atrocities. Rogue states don't form anything so coherent as an axis. But everybody now understands the premise.

    The velociraptor has been right before. In the 1980s Mr Wolfowitz vigorously supported Ronald Reagan's denunciation of the Soviet Union as an “evil empire”—a phrase the conventional-minded of the time regarded as bonkers. His willingness to trust his intellect against the weight of conventional opinion is admirable...


    In a 2004 speech to Polish academics and officials, Wolfowitz stated his beliefs eloquently and mapped his vision to their worldview:

    ...he recounted the events of Poland’s darkest days, and the civilized world’s acquiescence to Hitler’s ambitions which preceded them. When Hitler began to rearm Germany, Wolfowitz said, “the world’s hollow warnings formed weak defenses.” When Hitler annexed Austria, “the world sat by.” When German troops marched into Czechoslovakia before the war, “the world sat still once again.” When Britain and France warned Hitler to stay out of Poland, the Führer had little reason to pay heed.

    “Poles understand perhaps better than anyone the consequences of making toothless warnings to brutal tyrants and terrorist regimes,” Wolfowitz said. “And, yes, I do include Saddam Hussein.”

    He then laid out the case against Saddam, reciting once again the dictator’s numberless crimes against his own people. He spoke of severed hands and videotaped torture sessions. He told of the time, on a trip to Iraq, he’d been shown a “torture tree,” the bark of which had been worn away by ropes used to bind Saddam’s victims, both men and women. He said that field commanders recently told him that workers had come across a new mass grave, and had stopped excavation when they encountered the remains of several dozen women and children, “some still with little dresses and toys.”

    Wolfowitz observed that some people—meaning the “realists” in the foreignpolicy community, including Secretary of State Colin Powell—believed that the Cold War balance of power had brought a measure of stability to the Persian Gulf. But, Wolfowitz continued, “Poland had a phrase that correctly characterized that as ‘the stability of the graveyard.’ The so-called stability that Saddam Hussein provided was something even worse.” ...


    History will be the ultimate arbiter, determining whether Wolfowitz's vision can stand the test of time. My money is on his vision and not the alternative, head-buried-in-sand approach of worshipping the status quo. In an age where a single terrorist can unleash catastrophe on the civilized world, Wolfowitz wants to make the civilized world bigger. His longstanding vision of human freedom continues to undermine authoritarian regimes and shake the very foundations of the planet.

    In all likelihood, history will not speak kindly of his detractors. Instead it will speak of a man whose vision changed the world.
     

    Interview with John O'Neill



    Click here for AmazonThe invaluable LGF points us to this fascinating interview with John O'Neill in the most recent issue of The American Enterprise. O'Neill, of course, is one of the SwiftBoat Veterans who had an enormous impact on the recent Presidential Election. And, according to O'Neill, they tried to convince the Democratic Party to nominate someone, anyone, other than John Kerry. The Swiftvets, far from being partisan, simply despised the idea of Kerry as President.

    Coincidentally, today marks the forty-fifth day since John Kerry promised -- on national television -- to sign his Form-180, which would release his military service records. He has yet to do so. Anyone still undecided as to the truth behind his military service need only contemplate that Kerry, despite his promises, continues to stonewall on his service records. That should tell you all you need to know.

    TAE: How and when did the idea for the Swift Boat veterans group come into being?

    O’NEILL: The one who conceived of this was Admiral Roy Hoffmann. He began contacting many Swift Boat people in January and February last year. At that time, I was in the hospital. I had given my wife a kidney for a transplant.

    I became a part of it in early to mid March. I was motivated by several things, the first and most important being a genuine fear of what would happen to our country, our national security, and our armed forces if John Kerry became Commander in Chief.

    The reason we had our press conference on May 4 was that we thought if we could come forward quickly, we might be able to prevent John Kerry from becoming the Democratic nominee and allow the Democratic Party to pick someone else, in which case we could all go home.

    TAE: At the Swift Boat veterans’ May 4 press conference you had an open letter calling Kerry unfit to be Commander in Chief. It was signed by virtually all of John Kerry’s commanders in Vietnam. Yet the story fell flat. The media ignored it. How did your group react to the media blackout?

    O’NEILL: We were shocked. We couldn’t believe it. I haven’t been involved in politics or media relations, and I thought the job of the media was primarily to report the facts. It was obvious to me that many hundreds of his former comrades coming forward to say that he lied about his record in Vietnam and that he was unfit to be President would be important information for Americans. I only then became aware of the bias of the media.

    TAE: How do you explain the media’s response?

    O’NEILL: The establishment media was very pro-Kerry. They were opposed to any story that was critical of Kerry, and I believe that they were captured by their own bias. We met with one reporter around that time. We told a story to him relating to Kerry’s service. He acknowledged it was true and terribly important. And he told us he would not print it because it would help George Bush. That’s when we began to realize we had a real problem on our hands.

    TAE: Is there anything other than pro-Kerry bias to account for the establishment media’s attitude to the story?

    O’NEILL: Perhaps a second factor is that there are very few veterans in the established media. It makes it very difficult for them to understand the story or to care about it. That’s very different from the situation 40 or 50 years ago when most people had served in some fashion in the armed forces or had uncles or brothers who had.


    The American Enterprise: John O'Neill
     

    Tuesday, March 15, 2005

    BlatherWatch: Tom Teepen



    Click here for AmazonIt is through a lense of grim compassion that I view certain liberal pundits: Maureen Dowd and Richard Cohen, for instance. This pair is so committed to their litany of failed predictions that they'll stick with them no matter how far out of whack they may be.

    But I feel a certain sympathy for them: at least they truly are committed, along with being sour and inane. Who can blame them? History hasn't treated either kindly and, given the momentum of the Administration's sweeping initiatives, it's only going to get worse for them.

    Thus, I do feel a sort of compassion for them... much like I have for an organ-grinder's monkey at the circus. After all, Dowd and Cohen are the tiny monkeys sitting on the shoulders of the heavyweight op-ed writers on their respective newspapers. Like clockwork, you can expect the Dowds and Cohens of the world to chime in with -- no, not an original thought -- hamhanded attempts at humor sprinkled with their traditional Democratic groupthink. In perfect harmony with the fever swamp, both have achieved a track record of spectacular, flame-out-at-the-air-show-and-smash-into-the-tarmac-with-blazing-explosion failures.

    Thus, one can't help but feel compassion, not only for their poor track record, but also for the plain fact that so few people even read them anymore.

    Other liberal pundits are simply... not all there. Their driveways don't go all the way to the garage. A few sandwiches shy of a picnic. The elevator doesn't go all the way to the top floor. A guy like Tom Teepen comes to mind. He differs from the top-shelf liberal punditry on a couple of parameters: sheer ignorance, for one. A willingness to ignore reality. And, of course, astoundingly poor writing skills. Here's his latest gem, courtesy of Cox Newspapers. My comments are in bold.

    Bush scores some early wins - By Tom Teepen - 03/15/05

    President Bush guessed that the political tremors from unhorsing Saddam Hussein would crack brittle authoritarian regimes throughout the Muslim Middle East and hoped a democratic phoenix would rise from the rubble. So far the president is half right, and something is flapping around in the debris. The question is whether it is Bush's phoenix or a vulture.

    A phoenix or a vulture? Hard to tell where this is going, Tom...

    Iran holds out, a republic in name and a theocracy in practice, but movement elsewhere in the region is promising.

    Libya has resigned its nuclear ambitions. Syria has pledged to remove its occupiers from Lebanon. Egyptian strongman Hosni Mubarak says he will admit other candidates in this fall's presidential voting, turning another empty referendum into an actual election. The Saudis have permitted local elections, though of course for boys only. Palestinians and Israelis are talking, albeit at arm's length.

    A capitulation from Tom Teepen? After all of the years of flaming, poorly-written, anti-Bush rhetoric? Can it be happening? Someone pinch me.

    Not all, and perhaps not even most of this change is Bush's doing.

    There we go... that's the Tom Teepen I expect...

    Pariah Libya had been dickering for years to get itself back into the international game, even before Iraq was a gleam in Bush's eye. The potential for an Israeli-Palestinian deal mainly occurs because Yasser Arafat finally had the good grace to die and because Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who is turning out to be as hard-nosed in peace as in war, is committed to withdrawing from Gaza and is prepared to see a Palestinian state created there and in the West Bank.

    Yes, it was all happening with or without President Bush, according to the deep-thinker... plans were already in motion... forces gathering... it was all just... just a coincidence, yes, that's it!

    Syria has pledged before - most recently in 1989 - to quit Lebanon, only to balk when international attention strayed. For at least the next several weeks, Bashar Assad means to keep two-thirds of Syria's Lebanese forces in the eastern Bekka Valley, still close enough and large enough to be intimidating.

    After the years of international failures in extricating Syria from Lebanon... now that the timeframe is weeks, Mr. Teepen still isn't gracious enough to extend credit to the Administration.

    All that said, those of us who considered the Iraq adventure ill-conceived and ill-executed - and still think as much - nonetheless have to concede that it is partly responsible for shaking up the Mideast in ways that at least potentially could settle out for the better.

    Partly responsible. Well, I guess it is hard to say in print, 'You know, for many years, I've been a blathering, partisan nincompoop... and completely wrong to boot. President Bush was right. I was too thick-headed to see it coming. I surrender... and hereby willingly sign up as a GOP fundraiser.'

    But in every quarter, the potential for all of this to go awry is equally strong. Egypt's numerous small parties could splinter the opposition and let Mubarak romp to a mock legitimacy. Even if Assad keeps his word - big if - Lebanese politics could break down again into the sectarian fighting - Sunni, Christian, Druze - that fueled a 15-year civil war, and Shiite Hezbollah, with proven fighters and a ready infrastructure, is there to pick up the pieces. The gingerly Israeli-Palestinian pavane toward peace is ever vulnerable to terrorist sabotage.

    There we go, Tom! Find the dark lining in the silver cloud... hoping against hope that the U.S. fails... excellent work!

    And, of course, the relative success of the recent election in Iraq aside, the construction there of a credible, able government that reconciles Sunnis, Shia and Kurds - and all of that in the teeth of a stubborn insurgency - remains far short of certain.

    Memo to self: Google Teepen's statements prior to the election. One would hope that you could give credit where credit is due... but that would be asking too much of a serial blatherer.

    Bush has sensibly so far declined to crow. We can all hope for good outcomes, but apparently the president has learned from Iraq, if nothing else, that the Middle East has an unfortunate knack for turning even apparently accomplished missions into damnable problems.

    Well, I guess this is as close to an admission of wrong-headedness that we'll get from Mr. Teepen. Just so long as he can continue to take no risks whatsoever and proclaim the Administration's failures whenever something, anything, goes wrong, Mr. Teepen's world will be just fine in his book. Thankfully, it's a book few read.


    Tom Teepen: Bush scores some early wins
     

    Saturday, March 12, 2005

    The Fallacy of the Vanquished Democratic Party



    Click here for AmazonThere appears to be a new GOP meme wafting through the new media that goes something like this: the Democratic party "has been completely intellectually vanquished". That "we [continue] to tally up the 'I told you so’s.'". Or reveling in the seeming surrender of the MSM with their refrain that, "maybe Bush was right." And, of course, celebrating victories over partisan hacks disguised as unbiased newsmen.

    But I think it's a mistake. There are legitimate opportunities for the Democratic party to make inroads, albeit on issues not quite so critical as national defense. Here are four issues on which I believe that the GOP is increasingly vulnerable:

  • Reliance on Oil - the GOP needs to put its money where its mouth is, and dramatically raise the fuel economy requirements for automakers. For years, lobbyists for GM, Ford and the usual suspects have been successful at preventing major changes in fuel economy standards. And that's an opportunity for the Democratic party to make real inroads on an issue that's hitting every American smack dab in the wallet. There's no good reason that fuel economy standards aren't aggressively raised each and every year... and that vehicles like SUVs and pickup trucks aren't classified correctly.

  • Social Security - Rather than insisting 'there's no problem' (instead of taking the intellectually honest, though ineffectual, line that Bill Clinton and Al Gore took in the late nineties), why don't the Dems stake out a plan that resonates with the American public? It doesn't have to be private accounts... but something that can salvage the system. After all, anyone with a grade-school education knows we have a problem.

  • Medicare - No one in either party is talking about the five trillion pound gorilla - Medicare. Look up unfunded liabilities in the dictionary and you'll probably see a picture of the Medicare logo. How about someone -- anyone, for goodness' sake -- coming up with a plan to attack the problem?

  • Bankruptcy Protection - The GOP is ramrodding a bankruptcy bill through Congress that appears to deliver a gift-wrapped box o' money to the credit-card companies, whose business practices already border on the obscene. Because most bankruptcies are caused by legitimate, catastrophic disruptions to personal cash flow (extended illness, job loss, etc.), the GOP is doing the public, especially senior citizens, no favor with this sort of tripe.


  • The Democrats need a beachhead. They can pick one or more of these issues -- all of which resonate with the baby-boomer generation -- and make hay. But simply opposing anything the Administration does is not a strategy. And that seems to be the only play in the Howard Dean playbook thus far. If the Democratic strategists get their act together, though, watch out. There are plenty of vulnerabilities in the GOP defensive line.
     

    Friday, March 11, 2005

    Book Review: Frederick Forsyth's Avenger


    In the Tradition of Man on Fire



    Click here for AmazonThere are very few top-shelf revenge books. Certainly, A.J. Quinnell's Creasy series qualifies. Forsythe adds to the collection with Avenger, the story of Calvin Dexter. The protagonist is an attorney and triathlete who happens to be a Vietnam Vet. He served with distinction as a "tunnel rat", mastering the art of trapping Vietcong in the claustrophobic environs surrounding Cu Chi.

    After returning to the States, he experienced a personal and painful family tragedy. From that point forward, Dexter devotes himself to bringing certain parties to justice. Parties that others fear or are protected by foreign governments.

    One such party is Zoran Zilic, a monstrous war criminal who participated in some of the most gruesome crimes imaginable while Yugoslavia disintegrated. Zoran made the fundamental mistake of killing a volunteer aid-worker whose grandfather was a self-made Canadian billionaire. The grandfather, a World War II veteran, contracts Dexter to track down Zilic and exact revenge.

    Two issues cloud Dexter's mission. First off, Zilic has fled Yugoslavia for parts unknown, having seen the writing on the wall. Secondly, U.S. counter-terror groups have positioned Zilic to run missions for them to help combat the rise of Al Qaeda. Zilic is one of the few persons trusted by the terrorist hierarchy and therefore is the perfect pawn. Thus, a mercenary vigilante like Dexter must be removed from the scene.

    In intricately plotted detail, Forsythe describes how Zilic will be tracked down; how Dexter intends to accomplish his mission, come what may; and how the U.S. intends to deal with Dexter. Forsythe is still at the top of his game and "Avenger" -- trite name not withstanding -- is an outstanding read.
     

    Book Review: Robert Crais' Hostage


    It's like Reading an Action Movie



    Click here for AmazonFirst off: I'll admit I'm not a fan of the author's Elvis Cole series. But Hostage is a flat-out barn-burner. Written in a series of third-person vignettes, each from the perspective of a person ensnared in the drama, the action is pulse-pounding and compelling. Give yourself a few hours because, as passe as it sounds, you -- seriously -- will not want to put this book down. And I'm not exaggerating in the least.

    Within the first few pages, we encounter a trio of hoods who've recently been released from the pen. On the spur of the moment, they decide to rob a convenience store located in a ritzy, suburban neighborhood. In seconds, the robbery goes sour and they skeedaddle a ways down the road... until their vehicle suddenly dies. Exiting the road, they run into a high-end suburban enclave, and quickly end up in the backyard of a beautiful home.

    Unfortunately, a father and his two kids are actually in the house. The trio invade the home, looking for a vehicle or an exit route. Unfortunately for everyone involved, the police show up a little too quickly, and the scene rapidly degrades into a hostage situation.

    All is not as it seems, however. The accountant is no run-of-the-mill businessman. He is, in fact, a bookkeeper for the California mob and was only moments away from handing off some critical disks to a courier. The lives of many parties end up riding on the fate of the disks, from police officers, to mobsters, to the family in the house.

    Three words: just read it. You won't regret it for a split-second.
     

    Search Engine Optimization Trash Talk



    Click here for AmazonThere is one segment of eBusiness marketing that is both technically challenging and ultra-competitive. As you may have guessed from the title of this post, it's search-engine optimization. SEO is the art and science of moving certain search results up while pushing everyone else down.

    SEO can mean the difference between a successful and a failing business. High search-engine rankings can mean exposure and, interestingly, less exposure for your competition.

    For legacy businesses (e.g., a dental practice), SEO isn't quite so make-or-break a proposition. But it can still determine who will grow and who will wilt on the vine.

    My two brothers-in-law are in dental practice with their father (yes, coincidentally, he's also my father-in-law). All are excellent dentists and my father-in-law, Tudy, served on the State Dental Board for over a decade, if memory serves. As an aside, Tudy was an excellent athlete in his younger days, having played baseball at the University of Cincinnati (he was Sandy Koufax's battery-mate) and lettered for Ohio's state championship swimming team. In any event, the family is active in the community (e.g., Big Brothers) and well-known for being among the area's finest dentists.

    So, Marc, the oldest of the two brothers comes to me in a tizzy one day. He's searching for "City Dentist" on Google (city being our locale) and "City Cosmetic Dentist" and coming up with nothing, "We must be the one-hundredth search result."

    Since this is one of my areas of specialty, I tell him I can take care of it for him. After all, I spent several years munching sushi with P&G's leading e-business geniuses (guys like Ted McConnell and Terry McFadden) who had some visionary ideas in this space. I've added a bunch of proprietary tools to the repertoire and can now legitimately claim some proven expertise in SEO.

    Within a few weeks, the In-laws are the #2 result on "City Dentist" and #1 on "City Cosmetic Dentist". Marc starts trash-talking his competitor (we'll call him, "Wedge"). Wedge is one of these good looking guys who swung a gig on one of the TV network's makeover shows. Wedge knows what he's doing and has therefore rented out space on some of the dental link-farms to drive up his ranking.

    Of course, Marc being Marc, he has to talk trash to Wedge:

    "Wedge, when we get done with you, your dental practice will be nothing but a rumor."
    "Wedge, your search ranking is buried deeper than Jimmy Hoffa."
    "It's okay, Wedge... seeing as you're #103, I know you try harder."
    "Wedge, you still a dentist in town? Cuz I can't seem to find you in Google anymore."


    In all seriousness, SEO is an arduous, no-nonsense game. Real money and livelihoods ride on these rankings. If you do engage someone to handle SEO for you, make sure they can point to some real and current search results so you can judge for yourself. Just like any other business, there are those who know what they're doing and there are those who simply claim they know. The difference will be visible at places like Google.

    Wednesday, March 09, 2005

    Voices of Reason



    Click here for AmazonSen. Joe Lieberman (D-CT) on CNN: "So, at some point we've got to stop criticizing each other and sit at the table and work out this problem … Every year we wait to come up with a solution to the Social Security problem [it] costs our children and grandchildren and great grandchildren $600 billion more." It's a pity more Democrats haven't aligned themselves with this centrist voice of reason. Well, perhaps it's not a pity, for as long as the Michael Moore-led, Left Bank wing of the party dominates, they'll continue to lose elections.

    Dan Rather, in the LA Times, "I've learned to trust the audience," explaining his removal from the anchor job at CBS News amid its abysmal ratings slide. When the audience disappears, so must Dan.

    Benjamin Blatt reveals that New York Times reporter Chris Hedges may be positioning himself as Jayson Blair's successor. Regarding Hedges' claimed presence at the Battle of Khafji during Operation Desert Storm, Blatt calls out Hedges, "Your version of the events in Khafji doesn’t appear to correspond with objective reality. It makes me wonder about the content of the rest of your book." It looks like another proud milestone for the Gray Lady.
     

    Tuesday, March 08, 2005

    Gun ban utopia sees an increase in violent crime



    Click here for AmazonI couldn't help but insert some snide remarks on this interesting news (my comments in bold) from a newspaper in California.

    In a pattern that's repeated itself in Canada and Australia, violent crime has continued to go up in Great Britain despite a complete ban on handguns, most rifles and many shotguns. The broad ban that went into effect in 1997 was trumpeted by the British government as a cure for violent crime. The cure has proven to be much worse than the disease.

    Crime rates in England have skyrocketed since the ban was enacted... the violent crime rate has risen 69 percent since 1996, with robbery rising 45 percent and murders rising 54 percent. This is even more alarming when you consider that from 1993 to 1997 armed robberies had fallen by 50 percent. Recent information released by the British Home Office shows that trend is continuing.

    Reports released in October 2004 indicate that during the second quarter of 2004, violent crime rose 11 percent; violence against persons rose 14 percent.

    The British experience is further proof that gun bans don't reduce crime and, in fact, may increase it. The gun ban creates ready victims for criminals, denying law-abiding people the opportunity to defend themselves.

    Is it really that difficult for the Toby Hoovers of the world to understand? Criminals, by definition, don't obey laws. Therefore, laws designed to restrict access to firearms will remove them only from the hands of the law-abiding. It's not exactly neurosurgery.

    In contrast, the number of privately owned guns in the United States rises by about 5 million a year, according to the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. The number of guns owned by Americans is at an all-time high, fast approaching 300 million.

    That's only one for every man, woman and child in the country. We must do better... and we can do better!

    Meanwhile the FBI reports that in 2003 the nation's violent crime rate declined for the 12th straight year to a 27-year low. The FBI's figures are based on crimes reported to police. By comparison, the U.S. Department of Justice reported in September that, according to its annual national crime victim survey, violent crime reached a 30-year low in 2003.

    Let's see if I've got this straight: crime keeps dropping in the relaxed environs of the United States while in restrictive countries like the U.K. and Australia, violent crime (especially  gun crime) is exploding. I wonder if any lessons can be gleaned from these statistics? Let me ruminate on that for a while. Talk amongst yourselves: topic - did the fall of Rome really end the 'Age of Enlightenment'?

    Right-to-Carry states fared better than the rest of the country in 2003. On the whole, their total violent crime, murder and robbery rates were 6 percent, 2 percent and 23 percent lower respectively than the states and the District of Columbia where carrying a firearm for protection against criminals is prohibited or severely restricted.

    You mean the brilliant Eric Fingerhut was wrong when he said, "the presence of a gun is actually likely to escalate violence"? And the omniscient Toby Hoover completely flubbed her prediction that, "we will have more shootings, more accidents"? My whole world is crumbling! How could those <spoonerism> two shining wits </spoonerism> possibly be wrong?

    On average in Right-to-Carry states the total violent crime, murder, robbery and aggravated assault rates were lower by 27 percent, 32 percent, 45 percent and 20 percent respectively.

    Maybe it's just a coincidence!!

    As usual, most of the states with the lowest violent crime rates are those with the least gun control, including those in the Rocky Mountain region, and Maine, New Hampshire and Ver-mont in the Northeast. The District of Columbia and Maryland, which have gun bans and other severe restrictions on gun purchase and ownership, retained their regrettable distinctions as having the highest murder and robbery rates.

    Makes you want to just go out and buy yet another handgun, doesn't it?


    Lake County Record: 'Gun ban' utopia sees an increase in violent crime
     

    Grimes Sets Off a Firestorm



    Click here for AmazonThe eloquent Richard Grimes, of Dr. Dobbs Journal fame, recently set off a firestorm in the software development corner of the blogosphere. Having written a .NET column for three years, he'd come to the end of the line. His reasoning? Read the whole thing, but here's his summary.

    ...Microsoft's current operating systems, XP and Windows 2003, do not depend on .NET; and with XP, .NET is an optional component. The next version of Windows, codenamed Longhorn, was released as a technical preview at the 2003 PDC, and it looked as if the operating system would have .NET's tendrils throughout. However, a lot has changed since then.

    ...I have a very cynical opinion of .NET. The framework has a lot of promise, but I think Microsoft was far too ambitious releasing far too many assemblies much too quickly. As a result design suffered [and]... we are stuck with the library we have...

    [.NET is] intended for users to develop applications, but not for Microsoft to create operating systems or the revenue generating products that they base their profits on...


    In other words, Grimes posits that .NET is a sort of "development-lite" environment that carries a heavy run-time penalty (which, surprisingly, doesn't even come with the operating environment).

    Dan Fernandez, Microsoft's Visual C# Product Manager, responded to Grimes' criticisms in his own blog entry. But I found the most compelling remarks in the comments on Fernandez' blog, not the blog post itself. Here's one that resonated with me, as a commercial software developer:

    # .NET Distribution should not be a developer burden 3/7/2005 6:29 AM Mark Munz

    The fact that Microsoft has NOT pushed .NET frameworks onto Windows machines lends to the lack of credibility in Microsoft's claim that .NET is the future... client side deployment of the .NET framework is crucial. Not every app is going to be server-based... Putting the burden of redistributing the .NET framework on the application developers is unprofessional for an OS company. And fear of taking some flack for including the .NET framework in a SP has got to be the lamest excuse I have ever heard...

    So smaller developers are left telling their customers -- yes, our application is 1MB, but you have to download a 25MB framework first. That's right, you have to download and install a component that is 25 times the size of our application in order to use our application. The result, we -- the smaller developers -- are the ones who look unprofessional...

    The truth is that it is mainly Microsoft's own fault that .NET is not more widely used today.


    Another heavy-duty software blogger, Mark Lucovsky, weighed in with some meaty remarks on the nature of shipping software.

    Consider the .NET framework for a second. Suppose you wrote something innocent like a screen saver, written in C# based on the .NET framework. How would you as an ISV "ship your software"? You can't. Not unless you sign up to ship Microsoft's software as well. You see, the .NET Framework isn't widely deployed. It is present on a small fraction of machines in the world. Microsoft built the software, tested it, released it to manufacturing. They "shipped it", but it will take years for it to be deployed widely enough for you, the ISV to be able to take advantage of it. If you want to use .NET, you need to ship Microsoft's software for them. Isn't this an odd state of affairs? Microsoft is supposed to be the one that "knows how to ship software", but you are the one doing all the heavy lifting. You are the one that has to ship their software the last mile, install it on end user machines, ensure their machines still work after you perform this platform level surgery.


    Exactly. Well put.

    One of my current popular downloads (over 1.2 million copies downloaded) weighs in at under 700K and doesn't come burdened with a ginormous runtime.

    .NET done right would utilize a lean, on-demand framework that could be loaded as needed, right off the network if available. In the meantime, I can't use .NET for client-side apps for the reasons specified above.