RPG. Remember when that used to mean something? Role. Playing. Game. Role playing.  Immersive, complete, take over Role.  As much as a love a good MMOrpg , and the graphics that come with it, I can’t help but feel, there is something missing.  I enjoyed Neverwinter Nights beyond anything I could dream or fathom, and it was so close to perfect I still think about loading it up for another try.   Almost everything I wanted to imagine could be done with it.  I recreated my greatest characters, DMed games and made items and lands, quests, and even (dare I saw) dropped in few zingers.   But…I was missing something… That something about “The time when we [all our characters] were all splayed across the floor, every item used, every potion expended, and T Man stood up.., pointed at our DM and said ‘this is done. I’m rolling a 20.” Stepped back, and opened up the heaven of woop ass.”

We.  Our.  My.  It was real (within the context of the game world.).  I was invested, (and still am). I remember to this day, the incredible feeling and awfulness the first time (after years) my character died, and how it made my next character an obsessive defense master. 

But I also remember Diablo, and shouting and yelling as we had a “Leroy moment”[running into the room, activating all monsters] and realized someone had aggrooed all the guards in hell….that first character death was bitter, more so when I looked up from my computer walked out of the room to yell at my roommate who had gotten us all killed.  It wasin’t the playing, but the social interacting of the panic, the yelling at the screen and of course talking about it at lunch with the other Diablo players.  That shared experience about hell and wild panic.  A hidden geek social contract.

  Online playing vampire, and Mage and so many others, I still have stories about the man cliff hangers, the tension and the 20 character rooms waiting for the pin to drop.  RPG at it’s finest.   We knew each other by character colors, descriptions, methods of typing.  Who knew who ruled, in truth and online… it was a community.  What did they have in common?

1. The Social aspect.  Whether it’s net gaming, internet chat, or Xbox, being part of the group was always about… being part of the group.  Things happened in the group, the jokes, the Coke, the “I can’t believe you just jumped off a cliff” and GM reacting to the whim and craziness of the players. My chat room days was just as fun describing a battle as being in the battle afterwards, and my good friends relived mass moments of gaming lore, where someone did something we’d remember together.

2. I love seeing it, but I also like describing it.  Gamers talk with their hands, and their imagination.   There is not a GM, DM, storyteller, et al on the planet who has not had the perfect game fall apart, as the player does something ….unintentional.  Better yet, the adversarial (GM vs Players) nature of the game is preserved, and trust is rewarded.  The GM is not out to get you, because you CAN win…. But you can fail, and it will be more than creating another character or rebooting.

This game up because I saw a slide for a website. The slide had “RPG” on it, and described real mechanics, gorgeous graphics, storyline and epic quests, and strategy based battles, and right then I figured out what I didn’t like about modern RPG’s of the video game Varity. I figured out what was missing in today’s RPG’s.  They are Role playing  in title only.  You are not “Grandro, King of Servat.  Or Jim Danger, unlikely mage.” No, you’re playing a video game, where you get to make choices, sometimes, but it has an end, it has a story, and when you play again, it will be the same story, and no record of it will be kept.

Immersion is missing.   No, it’s not Mass effect.  Or Bio Shock. That’s just you, and some hanger on NPc’s you get to drag along, and when you die you curse and restart.  You’re forced to know about the world, because you need it to get the shotgun, and the “bio weapons of Boom” you really could care less about why.

Yeah, how many people know or care about the actually WORLD in Warcraft? Halo? It’s just a nice mechanics.  Very nice mechanics.  The backstory is Useful for if you raid or guild or which character you start as, but.. what about when you enter a town and the towns people boo? Or if you and the other players assemble to take the Castle and can’t overcome the defense.  Just long on and try again right?

Why does this matter? For years, I’ve had this game in my mind, and everyone who plays get’s invested in the game, their characters, and more importantly, the people they play with.  The game is mechanics heavy, but truly, it’s not (not if I can work it out) but it does require trust (as all rpgs) and time.

When White Wolf Studios closed their chat, I realized we’d lost something.  Many many people couldn’t find a group, lost the ability to really get into roleplaying as much as they could.  Furthermore, it was very much the way the game could  be played, exposed to sooo many people, and so many lives, it showed me a microcosm of life I didn’t know, as much as it sucked away my weekends.  I miss it.  I know it’s gone for the best (and my eventual growth) but just once, I wish to once again type out … “I enter.”

New ways of tackling Cancer are always being highlighted, -See below- but, there have been no advanced  changes in the fight of this disease.  One thing that has been identified at contributing to this slowness is the funding process (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/28/health/research/28cancer.html?em ). We think there is something else, we think capitalism wide, there is no real incentive to cure cancer. It’s not a conscious focus, it’s just the situation we’ve worked ourselves to.  

Cures, we believe, are one of the true governmental fixable problems.  Governments should dive in, collecting the Altruistic focus of us all, and then, finishing, switch gears.   A government should decisively work on curing cancer or anything else (like how they fund DARPA – Five years, all the money you like).  But the time limit is important.  The problem with Cancer now (40 year later since Nixon declared war) is the number of industries dedicated to it and a bureaucracy self interested need to survive.  This self interest now prevails, in the funding system- no one wants to fund a bad Grant so the grant system plays it safe, and few “leaps” can be made without risk-, in the Drug dispensing system, in hospitals and so on.

Admittedly the medical business model – for profit healing-; is flawed.  It’s not even cancer; seriously, where was the last time we cured something?  The capitalist business model for subscription based essential goods (or perceived essential –like internet service) is too compelling, and profitable.   Game developers and applications developers do it, Cellphone providers are doing it.  These are sure fire cash flow and so are cancer drugs and charities and sponsorships.  Entire industries (which have matured for 40 years) now solely exist on the cancer existing. There are numerous charities, charities events, grants, section of the NIH (national Institute of Health) dedicated to cancer.  Think of all the men, women, and events that would need to go away, find new jobs or even have to learn an entire new skill if cancer were cured.

Curing cancer is an end to a cash flow stream.  It means a couple of treatments, then done, over.  No 20 years of drugs and $100,000 medical bills.  No need to explore being an Oncologist in Medical college.   But if we, as a species, are going to say “There is something more than survival of the fittest, but also the extension of a health species.” We can’t keep figuring costs into keeping our fellow human alive.”

Ok, we are being too cynical. But if we cured cancer to morrow, I believe we’d have to slow roll a cure in over 10 years, so people know it’s coming, wind down. If a miracle cure were delivered tomorrow, shock would hit the medical community; people wouldn’t know what to do with themselves.   And you thought the bank collapse of 2008-2009 was interesting.

Promising Cancer technologies: Lasers (directly burning the cancer, Sasers vibrating the cancer,  Blocking protein and toxin injections.)

Lasers in Cancer

http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/therapy/lasers

Nano-tech laser kills cancer cells, leaves regular sells intact.

http://news.stanford.edu/news/2005/august10/nanotube-081005.html

Injected Isotopes type Cures or Toxins

http://gizmodo.com/379952/guy-invents-potential-cancer-cure-with-radio-machine-built-out-of-pie-pans-and-hot-dogs

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/29/health/research/29drug.html?em

I hope you remember this post, It’s about the EPA not enforcing a court order .  I also remind you about these two posts, one is on Presidents and choosing which laws to actually enforce (more, the executive branch) and the other is about News, and when you really should review it.  One will note this was a year ago, so it falls into the story is obviously crock (the one last year) turns out it was.

Well, in this update, it seems it’s not the EPA that was acting like a 12 year old, but the White House. What am I talking about, well, incase the article doesn’t link now, i’ll put the relevant quote.

The [Bush] White House in December refused to accept the EPA’s conclusion that greenhouse gases are pollutants that must be controlled, telling agency officials that an e-mail message containing the document would not be opened, senior E.P.A. officials said last week.

Yeah, you read that right.  They basically went “Out of sights, out of mind.” Here is the part where I don’t get.  The White House didn’t open the email, so the EPA just stopped moving forward.  Just like that. They could have walked it over, or gone ahead an implemented the original, none stripped down plan.  The original plan called for strict regulation of motor vehicle emissions that may (i say may) have saved $500 million over it’s policy term.
Remember the days when people who had an actually objection did their job? or Quit? I do my best not to criticize the present administration because they are doing what they believe in, and I can’t for the life of me think they are trying to destroy America, but it’s too … secretive. If one came out and said. “That’s not what we believe, and so we arn’t going to act on it” Then I have, 1) a sense of conviction, 2) a Sense of where you stand, and 3) who you are as a straight talking person.

Now, there is so much tape of our government backtracking, rewording and sometimes blatantly lying I don’t know what to think. Our government has become a rebellious child, so spoiled and self righteous that I ask this? What do you do when a time-out doesn’t work on your child?

Soon enough you’ll hear a story that you want to be false.  This involves usually horrific things (like fathers keeping their children in basements and getting them significant children. ) I bring you another.  Incase you can’t ready the link, the article is about a group of Highschool Kids  in Gloucester, Massachusetts who allegedly made a pact to get pregnant, and raise their children together. 17 are confirmed pregnant). Now, i don’t know if the pact is true which is why i’m not really commenting on it, but more on the state of the human condition which makes such acts possible. 

I have but one phrase:  WTF!!!!

It’s just a fact the more something is restricted, the temptation to do it is there. Because you have to experience what you’re missing.  The temptation rises if you can recover from it without permanent damage, never mind the damage you do to the people and world around you.  Still, i wonder what would possess 17 people, well, children, to go thur this.  It’s Odd.  It’s demographically weird.  All 17 of those children can’t be from the same background, same teaching, same values.

What makes disparate people do the things they do will always remain a mystery.  That a man in Texas and one in London like dressing in woman’s clothing, odd but ok. DO what you do!.  But when these girl in Mass are so close (and not in a cult) do something which is so clearly outside not only the social norm, but so potentially destructive, that i’d be interested in hearing.

I do not believe there is any training, abstinence program, positive sex teaching program, et. al.  that would have prevented something like this, unless, in interviews, these children all really think oddly, weirdly or are  under a universal misconception (sorry, the pun) of the facts of pregnancy.

But then, i think education about any controversial subject helps people make informed decisions, be it sex, drugs and alcoholic, or religion;  yup, the big three American taboos.  At least that way i know you made an informed decision, not an ignorant one.

Remember, back in the old days, you had to GIVE the bank money to hold your money. Right now, the promise of getting all your money back is what keeps you sane, and better yet,the government will just print more (cause, really, it can.). Let’ not talk about the inflation if the government just prints money. Let’s stick to the point.

As a mediocre, yet understandable economist, as well as a trained business manager, i get taught alot about the money multiplier. And the more I learned about it, the more I wanted to put my money under a mattress. The Central bank, the way we keep credit and “inflation.” is all a product of how we keep track of money, and this “check money.” of keeping track is more and more entrenched in our lives. It’s hard to think that “central” banking (as we know it)was created in the 60′s 70, while the theory and applications of central banking long existed. A credit crisis? We created it, and it leads us to a particular hell.

What am I talking about. Well, let’s really examine why everyone likes you to direct deposit your check.

Put $100 in the bank. The bank is allowed to loan all but 20% out, so they keep $20 and loan out $80. Using that as a perfect circle of deposit and lending it comes out to $457.05 deposited, $357.05 loaned out and $100 saved with the Central bank, $89.26 in their vault and 10 people have put money in the bank. Say your employer had to pay you $100 (you’re a really had good month). The bank does not have $100 actual cash to actually give you. However! However, they do have paper assets of $457.05 on tap, and $357.05 Account receivables. You could actually claim to have $814.10 (but that requires more finance than you’re going to sit thru) point is, the bank doesn’t have $100 -cash- to give. But the bank can transfer $100 in assets to you; And tada, you’ve been paid. The bank hasn’t lost anything- Incoming $100, out going $100- but it does have a new $100 to play with! and we already said it could turn that into $814.10!

Any student of accounting and finance is probably having a fit now. Why? we (and I say we) been taught that’s not really kosher, however, this is how some of those hedge funds and investment products are bundled. And this is how you, yes you, suddenly lose $200 when the bank fails, and the bank goes under for , yes, you got it, $1600. Paper money.

And that’s the amount the government has to recover when a bank fails. $1600. Paying back that much makes you’re money worthless and inflation takes off. The Dollar bottoms out and everyone loses. About this point and time, your running thru the math again, wondering how I turned $100 in to 1600, and more importantly, why you lost your $200, and your boss fired you (remember he’s poor too) and his business fails and your neighborhood feels the blow.

if the bank was good at investing, the bank took all it’s loans and said, hey, here is my loans, of $357.05 with incoming interest that’s worth really $400. If you give me $375.00 you can keep the profits of $25. Now a sale is made, and the bank now has actual cash of $375.05. Yeah! it can pay off all the people who may want money. But wait, it only has to keep 20% so yes, it sells the new money as loans! (the cycle continues).

The hidden question? Where did the seller get $375 to pay the bank? Did they pay in cash? probably not, they paid in Cash Equivalent Assets. (remember, we need to really add dozens of zero’s on the end here. No one walks around with that much cash).  Well because they used Cash Eq, they used, yes, Paper Money (called Check Money).

Now there are millions of dollars of paper money, yet no real cash. The invisible problem? This is really all debt. It’s a massive pyramid scheme with governments promising to help you (the small investor) if it collapses. I mean, at some point, some one has to -print money-. Unless you can find a new market, and therefore new incoming cash. Basically, the system is praying you do not want your money back, ever.

Btw, this is how insurance companies work too. Generally in major disasters, they go bankrupt. If you pay attention, you’ll see this “creative accounting.” infects all parts of our lives.

This is debt nation; and this is why we have to export a love of money. We need it to keep going.  And that was saving. Want to see what happens when we spend? I didn’t think so.

Welcome to capitalism.

We’ve alluded to the fact, in these editorials, it seems humans like settling for second best. We claim we want a better mouse trap but really we really don’t want a better mouse trap, we want to not see the dead mouse. Humans over and over again make choices based on “profitably” and “little hassle.” This entire thing brushed into my mind to me as i listened to JFK. “We do these things not because they are easy, but because they are hard.”

When’s the last time we really did something hard? Is living a risk averse lifestyle so much better? I’d actually say yes, A risk averse lifestyle does not make you sedate or prudish, but, some risk are calculations meant to fight spending money.

People do not like change. Infact, they fear it, and any excuse, given political, religious, monetary or simply hate, develops and positions become intractable. Often, we reduce it to money but money is the easy culprit as is trying to ensure share holder value.We see this trend toward second or inferior applications of products and services in many industries:

Take for instance the safety saw. Inventer STeven Gass spent considerable amount of money, time and effort in trying to stop you and i from cutting off a limb with a circular saw. Why did it cost so much effort to even get agreement it worked? The commonly accepted reason of course is that he was fighting corporate interest, blah blah blah… What he was fighting was the bottom line, the cost of innovation and more importantly an uncanny ability of people to rationalize dangers as acceptable. Assembly lines are run at unit cost and even a small change, affects variable cost, which will change not only Gross Margin but also may touch on capital budgets and operation cost. EBIT will of course be affected. And in todays Wall street , earnings per quarter world, that is a nono.

Phones companies were the same way, until the Iphone. They constantly worked at making the phone do phone things and hiding features only the young would bother with. Now since Apple has redesigned the phone, it’s amazing how we all wanted those new features (note at the time of this writing i don’t have an iphone.)

Other examples? Douglas Engelbart invented the computer mouse, and that had to be dragged out of storage decades later by Bill gates and his Partner. It’s flat out a better way to use a computer to move about the screen quickly, yet, it almost died in a small closet. Jay Harman has invented a better way for mechanics to move about it fluids and air (which curiously models fluid dynamics) and years later, nothing, he’s not been able to convince anyone to use his knowledge. Use of other inferior products are not new. Nascar drivers fight almost every incrase of saftey devices, until someone dies. The HANS device was one of the best example of this resistance until the death of a very popular driver in Dale Earnhardt. Ever wonder why a race car driver can walk away from a 200mph crash in which his car flipped 6 times, yet 15 people die in a 40mph collision? I do.

Such weird, paradoxical examples are new, but may I remind you of the old examples about Galileo, and the fact that we were the Center of the Universe for a while, contrary to all evidence.

This “Thought Crime” is baffling, yet fascinating all the same. Yet we look back at people smoking and wonder why? or those who ride without helmets. On a genetics level, i wonder where this permanent skepticism comes in and why it’s there. We don’t want to be gullible fools, but why do we insist on keeping things, doing things, advocating things we know to be inferior to the new things that are presented to us. Is it that GUT feeling I talked about? Or is it Cognitive Dissonance gone wrong?

Sometimes, I weep for us.

What do you think?

As I am wont to do, I tend to look over old posts for other idea’s or maybe looking for something to more to add. As I’ve done so, I’ve come to an understanding of where I think i am going.

I tend to advocate or work within the sense of “reasonableness” in that, while people are apart on subjects, a reasonable, rationed argument can be brought to bare where both can be satisfied, at least in the short term.

I believe strongly in this theory, and one of my favorite stories is back in the old days, politics was not as bitter as it was today. No more than 20 years ago, you could be seen with a political opponent, go out , even have drinks after, because the work was left at work, but friendship and respect could continue after that.

This is not the case today (but it’s starting to come back). Being reasonable is not always compromising however, sometimes it’s looking at something from an angle that takes the differences away.

I’ll point out two of the arguments that usually have a strong opinion.

1. The 2nd amendment to the US constitution : The Right to bear arms. – You know what, if we get invaded, this will save our lives. I like guns, I want to learn to shoot them. I think everyone should have a healthy respect for the weapon. But again, why can’t you wait a week for a gun? really, if you want a gun TODAY, i want to be well away from you. A month is too long, that’s not reasonable. It’s the slippery slope argument, of course, but civilization is no longer the wild west. Saying criminals can get guns even with the wait is just the same as saying why have jails. After all, it doesn’t stop crime right? except it does make us safer from those repeat offenders.

2. Global warming: We can’t agree on whether it’s just an earthly cycle or global warming? Great, we can at least agree that a coal burning plant or 12 smoke stacks coming out of factory is probably bad. Again, just trying to be reasonable and reduce those emissions. It may just be a cycle of the planet, but i still don’t like a bright and sunny brown sky vs a blue one.

Now, of course, there is reasonable and somethings i consider pretty assassine:

1. The supreme court ruling on expanding Eminent domain.  Eminent domain is the ability for the government to take away things from private citizens for its use (with a “reasonable” ) compensation. After all, the most famous use is the highway project of old, which makes america and its remote quaint places so accessible.  Well, the new ruling added a new twist. The government can take away private land, for a commercial enterprise, in that the commercial enterprise can be deemed a public good. Like a shopping mall. Yeah. Read that again, a shopping mall.  A Park? everyone gets to use, a highway, I can drive it, even a military base, it protects all of us equally. A shopping mall?! Why not a theme park? we can all go there right? or a wine cellar? free wine . everyone? The ruling is stupid. I believe it’s stupid and for many reasons. Eminent domain should stay with the government, giving a clear benefit, to the people of the state(or federal or state ) and not purely commercial interests.
2. Logging: California is experiencing more and more forest fires. Way back in the early days of the administration, they came up with a very novel way to solve the problem. Increase the area and scope of logging. That’s right, to cut down on forest fires, they cut down the forests. I don’t even think it needs a thick description. What about the reduction of top spoil? the Barren lanscape? It took 100 + years for that tree to grow, does cutting down the rest of the forest really help stop it from burning?  Answer, yes, but the original reason you didn’t want it to burn was so there would BE a forest.  I know we need trees and what they make, but at least come up with a better reason to cut them all down.
3. Permanent Residence Immigration policy (American)Deportations are up in america. Not for illegal immigrants, but for legal ones. It turns out that no matter how long you’ve been here (the cases i’m referring to are actually based on people here like 10 years) and followed all the rules, if you’re citizen ship application gets rejected,you get deported. You’ve had a green card for years and pretty much, you were going to keep having that greencard. Your only wrong? Applying for citizenship. Why did you get rejected? Quota filled up. Do they give you back your greencard and say try again next year? No! They deport you! Really? I mean.. Really? What’s wrong with that picture?

4. Turns out the reason so many planes crash in south america is because certain elements remove the towers which tells planes where to go and what altitude to stay put at. Two words, Ground penetrating Radar. That’s something a government should subsidize instead of trekking into the jungle and rebuilding the towers.

5. Safety Circular Saw. (and other products to protect you). Most things that people make have to reach a certain level of safety. Saws are one such thing of course. Well, a safety saw was invented that -would not cut the skin-. It just won’t. It’s been tested, over and over and over and well, it just won’t. Why is it not in production? the people who make saws are blocking it. Why you ask? Because it turns out there is a quirk in the law that states, if there is a minimum safety level, it has to be followed. The safety saw is proof of concept, which would mean all saw manufactures would have to change all their circular saws. Apparently doing that cost too much money, so no go. You get to lose an arm in an industrail accident.

.These are just a few of the things that drive me batty in the world today. But then i’m young, maybe i just expect a little too much. I’ll wait and see if it gets better.

And now, race.

You ever notice that when you run across something on the internet, it’s a buzz. You suddenly start to notice it everywhere, it comes up in conversation and then suddenly you are part of the viral masses? Well, there are things on the internet people also whisper about, and yet still share. One such site is HockeyFights.com Hockey is not about fighting and this years (08) play off have been nothing short of kicking, however, a rabid friend of mine, and by that i mean both acting and about hockey sent me this site. He kept gushing about it.

Anyway, sometimes, even the best of us picks the worst side of to show people. I am no different. Two of my favorite sites to show people are:

http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.wordpress.com/

http://www.blackpeopleloveus.com/

Now, it’s all in fun but if you have delicate sensibilities don’t go there. One is more serious than the other. Black People love us is more Onion like, but you have to have a sense of humor. The other, Stuff White People like, will, if you are Caucasian be amazingly embarrassed at. Another author felt this way. After reading that article, I was embarrassed for him too.

I show people these sites as most people show the Onion, but i am careful about who i show and why. I think everyone is. But why these two? Do they say i am racist, or does it say i can laugh at the ludicrousness of it all? Who am I when i share these URL?

The sharing of a URL is a whisper at times; Something you catch as you pass by a location, a cub, over a phone. These are a whisper places i go. On cell phones and blackberries and iphones, this hidden secret has kept moving around. As i was contemplating what to write after destroying your minds on Friday i kept thinking What does it mean on a culture of race relations that we pass both of these sites along as whispers. Is it a secret, is it like bring you along? a sign of trust? is it closet racism, or are we trying to bring them out into the light, get others to laugh at themselves and us?

My answer to many of my questions came to me when a friend came over to my desk and after talking a moment about the weekend -my desk is our water cooler-, I mentioned something a touch personal and laughed about it. I saw her hesitate and then leaned over to my keyboard and typed in http://www.aish.com/jewlarious/

I could only smile; I had my answer.

Do you have yours?

We’ve decided to try a different tac, and to do one of these things i am rather good at, link things which seem unlinkable at first glance, and I have chosen the Curse of Babel, and Disruptive Technologies.

Ahh, the Curse of Babel. First, for those who don’t know, it is the curse placed upon man by God, to speak forever different languages and to be divided. It was placed on man after they thought themselves above God, and took to building a tower to heaven. People of one race, speaking one language, suddenly couldn’t understand each other and no longer working as one.”

The curse of babel was disruptive, but man was far from finished. The very curiosity (and arrogance) which led to the creation of the tower of babel drives us today to overcome it. First language was newly invented, then it was stored (written down) and then, translated. But what does this have to do with Disruptive technology?

Revolutionary technology is disruptive technology. What is interesting is that almost all disruptive technology has been.. Communicative. The First disruptive technology was a book (or means to communicate by writing). But even the smartest of people have said “eh”.

When the telegraph was invented, someone went “What will we use it for?” When the telephone was invented, it was stated that no one would want to use one. When the computer was invented, it took two people in a garage raiding labs of big companies to bring about yes, a communication device. The World Wide web? Communication, and so the trend continues. From blackberries to Face book, from Onstar to Tom-tom gps devices, it is almost guaranteed that if you want a idea to explode and be disruptive, it needs to not only communicate, but it needs to show a group of people (groups are better for viral) How to communicate using it, in a way no one has yet thought off.

Talk to any kid on X-box live and the best/worst part is hearing that ass gloating over his kills, then laughing at him as he gets fragged, IN REAL TIME. One of the funniest thing that has come out are two packages, One is Jot, a little program for the blackberry. Know what it does? No, it does something simple. It enables you to type an email using your voice. Not revolutionary, but dictation is something that is just waiting in the wings. It’s just the darn comma’s and periods that get in the way. Still there are “Make the world smaller technologies, which are an offshoot of communication. I call these second level, because they are tangible, unlike the intangible examples i defined before. Cars, Planes, Bullet Trains. These make the world seem smaller. You can go across 4-5 European countries in 1/2 a day on their high speed trains. Most people don’t think it’s anything to drive from Florida to DC, or Alabama to Michigan (USA). (yes, I know the GPS belongs in this area better), The Highway is third Tier. It is an enabler, a technology complement, of the first 2, and are generally available to all. Satellite and Undersea cables improve telephones, but are themselves not very useful without the Disruptive technology (Intangible, then Tangible, preview of the first adopters and the rich usually.)

It should be noted that all of these disruptive technologies are a) abuse-able, b) spread things we’d rather keep private, c) rife with malicious intent, d) have a dedicated group of people wishing to keep it free. The Next big thing is Not Business intelligence or CRM software. Those are interesting, but only allow us to use the technology we have. The Iphone is revolutionary, and the moment it was produced it was copied and upgraded. Disruptive? not per say, to locked, monopolistic industries, but it did do something … it made us communicate better, again! Now anywhere I go i get google and yahoo maps. Now, I can get the voice mail i want and avoid the ones’ i don’t, i can indeed shut out the world and listen to my music.

Two more technologies are taking off. One is in the prototype stages but has been demoed. It allows someone to talk, just by thinking. It’s supposed to be used for cellphones. If you think for a moment that the military isn’t going to use it, you need a new head.

But it get’s better. Emotiv Systems has a helmet that allows you to control video games with just your mind. (that’s a google search, you can do yourself. ) What is a fact is that their are modders out there. Technologies will be combined, and controlling your computer by thinking about it is just a step behind, what about your phone, or even a plane? What if i just look at my computer and talk to the person at the other end of aim? What if the program naturally translates languages. It’s not that far away, i can get a guide digital recorder in which i talk into and press the button and it translates into the language i choose. Combines those two, allow anyone to speak any other language…. won’t the world be smaller then?

I can speculate all day, but this is a fact: Make the world smaller, make distances disappear, improve human communication… and but beware the curse of babel.

This is just embarrassing: 18 states are suing the EPA.  They are suing the EPA because the EPA has done nothing in response to a Supreme Court Ruling that said the EPA can regulate green house gasses.  The EPA previously said they did not have the authority. The Supreme Court decision was last April ‘07 (note it’s April ’08 now).  Now, the states are asking the courts to force the EPA to comply with 60 days. The EPA’s response is that the Supreme Court said it should, but did not say when it should.

Seriously?  Is the EPA a twelve year old? 

Long time readers know I’m already not going to tackle this one straight forward.  So let’s kick this particular thought crime.  The silliness of having one part of your government, sue another part of your government, only to be have the end result ignored, and then, yes, restarting process, can’t be cheap.  This is our tax dollars at work.   This entire process does not benefit me in anyway, except to kill more trees to print more court proceedings on how to save more trees!

What we have here is a prime example of the Executive Branch, declining to exorcise its power, and by doing so, ignoring another branch of government. Recall a previous Editorial where i pointed out this hidden power of the executive branch.  I call it a power, because call it childless, petty and small minded would make me seem … bitter.

As we know, splitting legal hairs is a function of lawyers and the guilty. I remind you of, “That depends on what the definition of is…, is.” But i am also a hypocrite. I like technicalities and “fine nuisances”  I like it when innocent people get off on a technicalities and i for one can argue the fine point out of two guilty parties suing each other.  Like most other people, i’d use it to my benefit and decry its use by others.  Yes, I split hairs.

Those “hairsplitting” times are rather specific:  Standing up for something i believe in, or holding a high moral banner charged with the protection of item, event, person or place i believe in all good conscience only the soulless wouldn’t protect. I am a hypocrite because i have a brain and common sense. I can play both sides of this argument because i’m human and i believe every situation is a new, different and interesting subject to be judged independently.

But I hold the line at acting like a 12 year old.